On Tue, 4 Nov 2025 21:06:59 GMT, Andy Goryachev <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Original user feedback (see >> https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/openjfx-discuss/2025-August/000267.html ) >> called for adding an `allowUndo` parameter to `applyStyle()` and >> `setStyle()` methods similarly to `replaceText()`. >> >> Upon further analysis, the `allowUndo` parameter was a mistake: allowing the >> application code to disable creating undo/redo entries messes up the >> internal undo/redo stack. >> There is an internal need (`UndoableChange`), but it should not be exposed >> via public API. >> >> This PR also adds `isUndoRedoEnabled()` and `setUndoRedoEnabled()` to the >> `StyledTextModel`, as well as its forwarding aliases to `RichTextArea` to >> allow for the application to disable undo/redo temporarily, for example, >> when building a document from multiple segments. >> >> WARNING this is an incompatible change, permitted because of the incubator. >> >> There remains a possible issue with currently unlimited size of the >> undo/redo stack - perhaps we should limit its depth to maybe 100-200 >> entries, see https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8370447 . > > Andy Goryachev has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional > commit since the last revision: > > javadoc Javadoc tool seems to allow a link to a private method from a javadoc comment. Could be a bug, could be by design. ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/1941#issuecomment-3488095620
