On Wed, 13 Sep 2023 14:57:54 GMT, Andy Goryachev <ango...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> PR adds tests mentioned in the title - a new `AttributesTest` class is added >> testing iconification, maximization and full-screen-ification of a Stage. >> >> All variants are tested with decorated stage style. >> >> Iconification is tested via overlaying two stages on top of one another, and >> then iconifying the top one - this is similar to already existing >> `IconifyTest.java` but it tests just the iconfication process and nothing >> more. >> >> Maximization and FullScreen are both tested by creating two stages _not_ >> overlapping each other. After maximization/fullscreen top stage (being >> always on top as well) should cover the bottom stage. Moreover, FullScreen >> and Maximize are differentiated by checking if window decoration exists - >> maximized Stage will have its decoration taking space on top of the screen, >> whereas FullScreen one will not. >> >> **NOTE:** on macOS I had issues with `getColor()` returning a valid color >> when called a second time. This only happened on macOS and with FullScreen >> test (others worked fine). Unfortunately I couldn't figure out why it >> returned (0, 0, 0, 255) or (255, 255, 255, 255). To mitigate that I moved >> color checks into separate `runAndWait()`-s with a small sleep between them, >> which seemed to help `getColor()` return proper values. >> >> Verified to work on Windows 11, macOS and Linux. > > tests/system/src/test/java/test/robot/javafx/stage/AttributesTest.java line > 46: > >> 44: import test.robot.testharness.VisualTestBase; >> 45: >> 46: import static test.util.Util.TIMEOUT; > > this might be my personal preference - I think it's easier to read > Util.TIMEOUT in the code rather to use a static import (especially since it's > used only twice) I prefer the static import in this case. More to the point, this is what most other tests do. > tests/system/src/test/java/test/robot/javafx/stage/AttributesTest.java line > 146: > >> 144: // wait a little bit between getColor() calls - on macOS the >> below one >> 145: // would fail without this wait >> 146: sleep(100); > > same - waitForIdle? I don't think so. This is a small sleep that isn't intended to wait for idle. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/1240#discussion_r1326307042 PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/1240#discussion_r1326316769
