On Thu, 8 Oct 2026 16:27:39 GMT, Michael Strauß <[email protected]> wrote:
>> The usual argument for unrelated changes is to make them in a separate PR >> for the sake or reviewers and backporters, but if we are touching this code >> we might as well clean it up. > > This pattern was [deliberately > introduced](https://github.com/openjdk/jfx/pull/1608#discussion_r1819938688) > so that static constants can be initialized from an expression. The > alternative, stuffing unrelated initialization code into a static > initializer, or having a static initialization method, has its downsides. Makes sense! Also not a fan of a static initializer. I think what Andy meant though (thats at least how I understood it), is that maybe some of those variables can be initialized directly by a one-liner, as the code got a bit shorter. But this is also not possible in a good way. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/2299#discussion_r4237577169
