On 26.08.2020 11:27, Philip Race wrote:
Can you please add an evaluation to the bug report explaining what you intend
to do.
Will do.
The submitter of that bug was clearly hoping that we'd support custom Image
subclasses
and this fix just changes the behaviour from an IAE (or similar) to silently
ignoring them.
I'm not sure what benefit there is there. It just means that people will be
more puzzled
as to what is going on than before.
After the fix, we will start to support them to some degree. The drawImage spec
does not have
any exceptions, this method can only report is the pixels were completly pushed
to the
destination or nor. After the fix we will report "false" for any unsupported
types of images.
The new behavior will be similar to the ToolkitImage case, when the image is
not loaded yet.
Also now we have more checks for specific known image types.
VolatileImage is an abstract class and I'm surprised that this is something
this fix
considers OK for subclasses to extend. Does that really work ?
This is a good question I'll double-check that.
I think we should have just closed this out as WNF / not an issue.
-phil.
On 7/27/20, 10:14 PM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
Hello.
Please review the fix for jdk/client.
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-7183828
Fix: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/7183828/webrev.00
Our DrawImage pipe, used as low-level machinery to draw the known type of
images, supports only
three types of images:
- ToolkitImage - implemented via ImageRepresentation.drawToBufImage()
- VolatileImage/BufferedImage implemented via different types of "loops"
We have a type check for the ToolkitImage image only, otherwise, we assume that
the image is
of type VolatileImage/BufferedImage, so if the user creates its own image and
passes it to
this pipe he will get an exception.
After the fix, such custom images will be ignored by the DrawImage pipe.
--
Best regards, Sergey.
