On Mon, 12 Jan 2026 16:23:11 GMT, Marius Hanl <[email protected]> wrote:

>>> > @Maran23 Hello, I noticed you've made contributions to this area before. 
>>> > Could you help me review this issue?
>>> > A relatively complete code example has been provided above. If you need a 
>>> > directly usable attachment, I can provide it.
>>> 
>>> Hi @youngledo , thanks for reporting this. To follow the normal procedure, 
>>> can you please file a bug in https://bugs.java.com/bugreport/ ? When doing 
>>> that, there is (after manual triage) machinery going on behind the scenes 
>>> that facilitates the whole flow between bug report, discussions, PR, 
>>> release docs etc.
>>> 
>>> I believe there is a fair chance indeed that the code you mention can lead 
>>> to regression in a number of situations. Your code sample would be helpful, 
>>> but is best provided after you report the bug. I notice there are @FXML 
>>> refs but I don't see an FXML file, so I suggest you upload a zip file (once 
>>> the issue is in JBS).
>> 
>> 
>> @johanvos 
>> Sorry, I forgot to mention that since I'm just a regular user, I couldn't 
>> figure out how to become a member. Could you help me submit the issue, or 
>> what should I do instead?
>> 
>> The sample project has been uploaded:
>> [demo-javafx.zip](https://github.com/user-attachments/files/24561207/demo-javafx.zip)
>
>> I forgot to mention that since I'm just a regular user, I couldn't figure 
>> out how to become a member
> 
> You are an `Author`, so you should be able to login to 
> https://bugs.openjdk.org/issues/?filter=39543.
> See also the message from `@bridgekeeper`
>> Welcome back youngledo
> 
> Without checking your example, simply removing both lines of code is 
> certainly not the right fix. This was implemented to fix problems, so I'm 
> pretty sure this will lead to regressions.
> 
> Also note that you should check if applying 
> https://github.com/openjdk/jfx/pull/1945 fixes your problem, as this is an 
> issue that could lead to many unnecessary relayouts right now.
> 
> Note that I believe that the performance of the `VirtualFlow` can be improved 
> a lot, but I'm not sure this is the right approach / the right place. 
> Example: the `removeAll` should not be triggered that often and the pile 
> should not be that big. If it is, we may need to check out why this is first.

@Maran23 Thank you for your reply. I am not an author yet; I am still in the 
application process.

Yes, you're right that deleting the code isn't appropriate, but I tried using 
the published version 24 locally and it worked fine.

Moreover, the sample code provided above is very simple, and it shouldn't be 
this laggy even when generating only a few entries.

I forgot to mention, my system environment is:
- Apple M1
- macOS 26.2

-------------

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/2030#issuecomment-3741362221

Reply via email to