On Thu, 21 May 2026 14:13:51 GMT, John Hendrikx <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> I think however we need a more compelling reason to get this merged (like a >>> broken test in current FX related to some complex property interaction), >>> otherwise I don't see this happening. >> >> I see. Is that possible to create? > >> > I think however we need a more compelling reason to get this merged (like >> > a broken test in current FX related to some complex property interaction), >> > otherwise I don't see this happening. >> >> I see. Is that possible to create? > > What I mean is, if there is a real bug that this PR would solve, then it is I > think more likely to be integrated. Currently the bug this PR solves is > recursive changes involving a ChangeListener that does re-registration of a > listener (removing it from `old` and adding it to `new`) -- the bug would > appear if the property is modified again before all its listeners were > notified. > > So in theory, it could be adding a change listener (as the user) to one of > the more obscure properties that Node has, and having that change listener do > something that triggers a nested change. If that property also has a > ChangeListener on it (from FX itself) that does the re-registration pattern, > then it would likely get the framework in a bad state (old listener not > removed, or listener added twice). > > To find one, one could look for places where this re-registration pattern is > used (I think I see it often used on scene properties), and then see if > adding a user listener on the same property (or related one) could interfere > with this process if it triggered a recursive change. > @hjohn can you check GHA failures please? Yeah, I was doing that. It's basically flakey because there is a check on standard error output, which is updated asynchronously (and so sometimes sees output, sometimes doesn't). The check however wasn't needed, as we already checked the output via a much more direct mechanism that works synchronously, so I've just removed the check. ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/1081#issuecomment-4919984869
