On Tue, 20 Oct 2026 09:33:09 GMT, Marius Hanl <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Fixed incorrect handling of the surrogate pairs in `GlyphLayout.breakRuns()`. >> >> Reviewers: @prrace @Ziad-Mid >> >> --------- >> - [x] I confirm that I make this contribution in accordance with the >> [OpenJDK Interim AI Policy](https://openjdk.org/legal/ai). > > modules/javafx.graphics/src/main/java/com/sun/javafx/text/GlyphLayout.java > line 271: > >> 269: if (complex) { >> 270: flags |= FLAGS_HAS_COMPLEX; >> 271: complex = false; > > `complex` is set to `false` here, but used again below. Is that a problem? > Looks very weird to me. it's the original code, I just fixed the formatting in a single place. > modules/javafx.graphics/src/test/java/test/javafx/text/TestGlyphLayoutBreakRuns.java > line 42: > >> 40: public class TestGlyphLayoutBreakRuns { >> 41: >> 42: record TC(String text, int ... runs) { } > > What is a `TC`? TestCase. It's a private class that packages arguments for a single test. Is there a problem? > modules/javafx.graphics/src/test/java/test/javafx/text/TestGlyphLayoutBreakRuns.java > line 56: > >> 54: @ParameterizedTest >> 55: @MethodSource("breakRunsSource") >> 56: public void testBreakRunsSurrogatePairsAdlam(TC tc) { > > And what is an adlam? > Shall we add the JDK ticket and a small description (one sentence) as > javadoc for the test? It's a script https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adlam_script You are right though, the test grew beyond Adlam. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/2349#discussion_r4328264126 PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/2349#discussion_r4328246638 PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/2349#discussion_r4328253693
