On Sun, 24 Aug 2025 20:20:12 GMT, John Hendrikx <jhendr...@openjdk.org> wrote:
> Seeing this a lot, what do you want to convey here? I'm just wondering what
> this would mean to a future maintainer... "don't accidentally make it
> protected because then it would be API"? Can add that to a lot of methods in
> FX then...
Yes, it's been used in other places to warn against promotion into the API by
mistake. I replaced it with a javadoc.
> modules/javafx.base/src/test/java/test/javafx/util/converter/DateStringConverterTest.java
> line 75:
>
>> 73: new TestCase(new
>> DateStringConverter(DateFormat.getDateInstance(DateFormat.LONG)),
>> 74: DEFALUT_LOCALE, DateFormat.DEFAULT, null,
>> DateFormat.getDateInstance(DateFormat.LONG))
>> 75: );
>
> Wouldn't this look better:
>
> return List.of(
> new TestCase(new DateStringConverter(), DEFALUT_LOCALE,
> DateFormat.DEFAULT, null, null),
> new TestCase(new DateStringConverter(DateFormat.SHORT),
> DEFALUT_LOCALE, DateFormat.SHORT, null, null),
> new TestCase(new DateStringConverter(Locale.UK), Locale.UK,
> DateFormat.DEFAULT, null, null),
> new TestCase(new DateStringConverter(Locale.UK,
> DateFormat.SHORT), Locale.UK, DateFormat.SHORT, null, null),
> new TestCase(new DateStringConverter("dd MM yyyy"),
> DEFALUT_LOCALE, DateFormat.DEFAULT, "dd MM yyyy", null),
> new TestCase(
> new
> DateStringConverter(DateFormat.getDateInstance(DateFormat.LONG)),
> DEFALUT_LOCALE,
> DateFormat.DEFAULT, null,
> DateFormat.getDateInstance(DateFormat.LONG)
> )
> );
Not in my eyes, but can change if you want.
-------------
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/1880#discussion_r2297838480
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/1880#discussion_r2297840346
