Re: AWT Dev [8] Review request for 7142091: [macosx] RFE: Refactoring of peer initialization/disposing
Hi, Sergey, this version looks fine. Thanks, Artem On 6/21/2012 2:42 PM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote: Hello, new version of the fix: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/7142091/webrev.01/ - invokeLater was removed from setVisible and dispose. - instanceof Graphics2D was added. Run some awt related jck and regression tests, no new issues found. On 18.06.2012 19:13, Artem Ananiev wrote: Hi, Sergey, some minor comments (may be unrelated to the fix): 1. LWComponentPeer.setVisible() can be made final. Do expect any subclass to override it instead of setVisibleImpl()? It is overriden in CPrinterDialogPeer. 2. invokeLater() in LWWindowPeer.setVisibleImpl(): I realize this is really painful issue, but I'd vote for removing this workaround. It would result in faster startup (although, the window will be solid gray for some time), and make LWAWT code similar to what we have on other platforms. removed Then next step will to minimize the delay between showing the window and painting its content. 3. LWWindowPeer.replaceSurfaceData(): what are benefits of setBackground() + clearRect() over setColor() + fillRect()? Although we always expect the Graphics object to be Graphics2D instance, this unconditional cast doesn't look great. done Thanks, Artem On 5/31/2012 5:43 PM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote: Hi Everyone, Please review the fix. Notes from the bug and comments: 1. setVisible() should be called at the end of the peers initialization. We can move super.initialize() to the end of the peers initializations. Initialize() was split to initialize() and initializeImpl(). In the initialize() we call initializeImpl and then we call to setVisible(). initializeImpl overridden in subclasses. 2. Invokelater in the initialization/disposing is a tricky. Left it as is. Probably later it will be changed. Comments was updated. 3. replaceSurfacedata() should be moved outside of LWWindowPeer.setVisible() Done. Also duplicate code was extracted to setVisible() method which call setVisibleImpl(). 4. Backbuffer in replaceSurfacedata() should be initialized by clearRect instead of fillrect(composite is important). Done. related to composite. 5. During lwwindowpeer initialization we call two similar methods nativeSetNSWindowAlpha() and setAlphaValue(). nativeSetNSWindowAlpha() removed from CPlatformWindow.java. Bug: http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=7142091 Webrev can be found at: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/7142091/webrev.00/
Re: AWT Dev [8] Review request for 7142091: [macosx] RFE: Refactoring of peer initialization/disposing
Hi Sergey, The fix looks fine to me, although I don't see changes to the CPrinterDialogPeer in this webrev. -- best regards, Anthony On 6/21/2012 2:42 PM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote: Hello, new version of the fix: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/7142091/webrev.01/ - invokeLater was removed from setVisible and dispose. - instanceof Graphics2D was added. Run some awt related jck and regression tests, no new issues found. On 18.06.2012 19:13, Artem Ananiev wrote: Hi, Sergey, some minor comments (may be unrelated to the fix): 1. LWComponentPeer.setVisible() can be made final. Do expect any subclass to override it instead of setVisibleImpl()? It is overriden in CPrinterDialogPeer. 2. invokeLater() in LWWindowPeer.setVisibleImpl(): I realize this is really painful issue, but I'd vote for removing this workaround. It would result in faster startup (although, the window will be solid gray for some time), and make LWAWT code similar to what we have on other platforms. removed Then next step will to minimize the delay between showing the window and painting its content. 3. LWWindowPeer.replaceSurfaceData(): what are benefits of setBackground() + clearRect() over setColor() + fillRect()? Although we always expect the Graphics object to be Graphics2D instance, this unconditional cast doesn't look great. done Thanks, Artem On 5/31/2012 5:43 PM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote: Hi Everyone, Please review the fix. Notes from the bug and comments: 1. setVisible() should be called at the end of the peers initialization. We can move super.initialize() to the end of the peers initializations. Initialize() was split to initialize() and initializeImpl(). In the initialize() we call initializeImpl and then we call to setVisible(). initializeImpl overridden in subclasses. 2. Invokelater in the initialization/disposing is a tricky. Left it as is. Probably later it will be changed. Comments was updated. 3. replaceSurfacedata() should be moved outside of LWWindowPeer.setVisible() Done. Also duplicate code was extracted to setVisible() method which call setVisibleImpl(). 4. Backbuffer in replaceSurfacedata() should be initialized by clearRect instead of fillrect(composite is important). Done. related to composite. 5. During lwwindowpeer initialization we call two similar methods nativeSetNSWindowAlpha() and setAlphaValue(). nativeSetNSWindowAlpha() removed from CPlatformWindow.java. Bug: http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=7142091 Webrev can be found at: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/7142091/webrev.00/
Re: AWT Dev [8] Review request for 7142091: [macosx] RFE: Refactoring of peer initialization/disposing
Hello, new version of the fix: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/7142091/webrev.01/ - invokeLater was removed from setVisible and dispose. - instanceof Graphics2D was added. Run some awt related jck and regression tests, no new issues found. On 18.06.2012 19:13, Artem Ananiev wrote: Hi, Sergey, some minor comments (may be unrelated to the fix): 1. LWComponentPeer.setVisible() can be made final. Do expect any subclass to override it instead of setVisibleImpl()? It is overriden in CPrinterDialogPeer. 2. invokeLater() in LWWindowPeer.setVisibleImpl(): I realize this is really painful issue, but I'd vote for removing this workaround. It would result in faster startup (although, the window will be solid gray for some time), and make LWAWT code similar to what we have on other platforms. removed Then next step will to minimize the delay between showing the window and painting its content. 3. LWWindowPeer.replaceSurfaceData(): what are benefits of setBackground() + clearRect() over setColor() + fillRect()? Although we always expect the Graphics object to be Graphics2D instance, this unconditional cast doesn't look great. done Thanks, Artem On 5/31/2012 5:43 PM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote: Hi Everyone, Please review the fix. Notes from the bug and comments: 1. setVisible() should be called at the end of the peers initialization. We can move super.initialize() to the end of the peers initializations. Initialize() was split to initialize() and initializeImpl(). In the initialize() we call initializeImpl and then we call to setVisible(). initializeImpl overridden in subclasses. 2. Invokelater in the initialization/disposing is a tricky. Left it as is. Probably later it will be changed. Comments was updated. 3. replaceSurfacedata() should be moved outside of LWWindowPeer.setVisible() Done. Also duplicate code was extracted to setVisible() method which call setVisibleImpl(). 4. Backbuffer in replaceSurfacedata() should be initialized by clearRect instead of fillrect(composite is important). Done. related to composite. 5. During lwwindowpeer initialization we call two similar methods nativeSetNSWindowAlpha() and setAlphaValue(). nativeSetNSWindowAlpha() removed from CPlatformWindow.java. Bug: http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=7142091 Webrev can be found at: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/7142091/webrev.00/ -- Best regards, Sergey.
Re: AWT Dev [8] Review request for 7142091: [macosx] RFE: Refactoring of peer initialization/disposing
Hi, Sergey, some minor comments (may be unrelated to the fix): 1. LWComponentPeer.setVisible() can be made final. Do expect any subclass to override it instead of setVisibleImpl()? 2. invokeLater() in LWWindowPeer.setVisibleImpl(): I realize this is really painful issue, but I'd vote for removing this workaround. It would result in faster startup (although, the window will be solid gray for some time), and make LWAWT code similar to what we have on other platforms. Then next step will to minimize the delay between showing the window and painting its content. 3. LWWindowPeer.replaceSurfaceData(): what are benefits of setBackground() + clearRect() over setColor() + fillRect()? Although we always expect the Graphics object to be Graphics2D instance, this unconditional cast doesn't look great. Thanks, Artem On 5/31/2012 5:43 PM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote: Hi Everyone, Please review the fix. Notes from the bug and comments: 1. setVisible() should be called at the end of the peers initialization. We can move super.initialize() to the end of the peers initializations. Initialize() was split to initialize() and initializeImpl(). In the initialize() we call initializeImpl and then we call to setVisible(). initializeImpl overridden in subclasses. 2. Invokelater in the initialization/disposing is a tricky. Left it as is. Probably later it will be changed. Comments was updated. 3. replaceSurfacedata() should be moved outside of LWWindowPeer.setVisible() Done. Also duplicate code was extracted to setVisible() method which call setVisibleImpl(). 4. Backbuffer in replaceSurfacedata() should be initialized by clearRect instead of fillrect(composite is important). Done. related to composite. 5. During lwwindowpeer initialization we call two similar methods nativeSetNSWindowAlpha() and setAlphaValue(). nativeSetNSWindowAlpha() removed from CPlatformWindow.java. Bug: http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=7142091 Webrev can be found at: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/7142091/webrev.00/
Re: AWT Dev [8] Review request for 7142091: [macosx] RFE: Refactoring of peer initialization/disposing
Hi Sergey,
Thanks for clarifications. Please find my comments below.
On 6/5/2012 8:13 PM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
3. src/macosx/classes/sun/lwawt/LWWindowPeer.java
179 updateInsets(platformWindow.getInsets());
The system may report wrong insets before a window is shown on the
screen. Perhaps, instead of initializeImpl() we should introduce
preInitialize() (== current initializeImpl()), and postInitialize()
(to where this, and the subsequent replaceSurfaceData() calls might go.)
Like it was done in XAWT? It is just a nightmare. I assume that
What kind of nightmare do you mean? To me it looks logical to perform
some tasks before, and some other tasks after disaplying a component.
Hence the need for per- and post- initializers.
updateInsets() should be called by some of the native callbacks, like
notifyExpose and reshape?
Nope. It's only called from the initialize() method once since on the
Mac insets never change. Therefore, it is critical to call it only after
showing the window on the screen.
On 6/5/2012 10:17 PM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
In this case In current implementation it works wrong too, because it can be
called when the window initially invisible.
So far, it works fine. Please run insets-related tests (simply all
automatic tests for Window, Frame, and Dialog both open and closed) to
makes sure they pass.
4.
220 protected void setVisibleImpl(final boolean visible) {
221 super.setVisibleImpl(visible);
Why do we remove a call to replaceSurfaceData() in the beginning of
the method?
Before the fix, setVisible() can be called before surface creation, but
after the fix it will be called after.
Could you clarify this further please? What exactly is the reason to
move the replaceSurfaceData() call from setVisible() to initializeImpl()?
5.
983 ((Graphics2D)
g).setBackground(getBackground());
I suggest to add an instanceof check before this call.
I guess that Buffered image cannot return something except Graphics2D
I guess so too. Nevertheless, I still suggest to add such a check.
6.
227 // invokeLater() can be deleted, but in this case we get
a lag between
228 // windows showing and content painting.
Is the lag so very noticeable? On other platforms we don't actually do
this, and I don't recall any issues about such lags.
Yes The difference is noticeable. So I update the comments and leave it
as is for now.
Interesting. This needs to be investigated, perhaps under a separate CR.
--
best regards,
Anthony
--
best regards,
Anthony
On 5/31/2012 5:43 PM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
Hi Everyone,
Please review the fix.
Notes from the bug and comments:
1. setVisible() should be called at the end of the peers
initialization. We can move super.initialize() to the end of the
peers initializations.
Initialize() was split to initialize() and initializeImpl(). In the
initialize() we call initializeImpl and then we call to setVisible().
initializeImpl overridden in subclasses.
2. Invokelater in the initialization/disposing is a tricky.
Left it as is. Probably later it will be changed. Comments was updated.
3. replaceSurfacedata() should be moved outside of
LWWindowPeer.setVisible()
Done. Also duplicate code was extracted to setVisible() method which
call setVisibleImpl().
4. Backbuffer in replaceSurfacedata() should be initialized by
clearRect instead of fillrect(composite is important).
Done. related to composite.
5. During lwwindowpeer initialization we call two similar methods
nativeSetNSWindowAlpha() and setAlphaValue().
nativeSetNSWindowAlpha() removed from CPlatformWindow.java.
Bug: http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=7142091
Webrev can be found at:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/7142091/webrev.00/
Re: AWT Dev [8] Review request for 7142091: [macosx] RFE: Refactoring of peer initialization/disposing
Hi Anthony.
See my comments inline:
09.06.2012 17:34, Anthony Petrov wrote:
Hi Sergey,
Thanks for clarifications. Please find my comments below.
On 6/5/2012 8:13 PM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
3. src/macosx/classes/sun/lwawt/LWWindowPeer.java
179 updateInsets(platformWindow.getInsets());
The system may report wrong insets before a window is shown on the
screen. Perhaps, instead of initializeImpl() we should introduce
preInitialize() (== current initializeImpl()), and postInitialize()
(to where this, and the subsequent replaceSurfaceData() calls might
go.)
Like it was done in XAWT? It is just a nightmare. I assume that
What kind of nightmare do you mean? To me it looks logical to perform
some tasks before, and some other tasks after disaplying a component.
Hence the need for per- and post- initializers.
Because in general nobody know correct place for initialization.
Moreover we can do something after component showing in setVisble(true)
only.
updateInsets() should be called by some of the native callbacks, like
notifyExpose and reshape?
Nope. It's only called from the initialize() method once since on the
Mac insets never change. Therefore, it is critical to call it only
after showing the window on the screen.
But what happens when the peer is invisible by default? Probably the
better place for updateInsets is setVisible()?
On 6/5/2012 10:17 PM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
In this case In current implementation it works wrong too, because it
can be called when the window initially invisible.
So far, it works fine. Please run insets-related tests (simply all
automatic tests for Window, Frame, and Dialog both open and closed) to
makes sure they pass.
See previous comment.
4.
220 protected void setVisibleImpl(final boolean visible) {
221 super.setVisibleImpl(visible);
Why do we remove a call to replaceSurfaceData() in the beginning of
the method?
Before the fix, setVisible() can be called before surface creation,
but after the fix it will be called after.
Could you clarify this further please? What exactly is the reason to
move the replaceSurfaceData() call from setVisible() to initializeImpl()?
Just because it is unnecessary in setVisble() because surface already
created at the end of LWWindow.initializeImpl(). Why we should try to
replace surface each time in setVisible()?
5.
983 ((Graphics2D)
g).setBackground(getBackground());
I suggest to add an instanceof check before this call.
I guess that Buffered image cannot return something except Graphics2D
I guess so too. Nevertheless, I still suggest to add such a check.
ok I will add.
6.
227 // invokeLater() can be deleted, but in this case we
get a lag between
228 // windows showing and content painting.
Is the lag so very noticeable? On other platforms we don't actually
do this, and I don't recall any issues about such lags.
Yes The difference is noticeable. So I update the comments and leave
it as is for now.
Interesting. This needs to be investigated, perhaps under a separate CR.
I will create new CR.
--
best regards,
Anthony
--
best regards,
Anthony
On 5/31/2012 5:43 PM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
Hi Everyone,
Please review the fix.
Notes from the bug and comments:
1. setVisible() should be called at the end of the peers
initialization. We can move super.initialize() to the end of the
peers initializations.
Initialize() was split to initialize() and initializeImpl(). In the
initialize() we call initializeImpl and then we call to
setVisible(). initializeImpl overridden in subclasses.
2. Invokelater in the initialization/disposing is a tricky.
Left it as is. Probably later it will be changed. Comments was
updated.
3. replaceSurfacedata() should be moved outside of
LWWindowPeer.setVisible()
Done. Also duplicate code was extracted to setVisible() method
which call setVisibleImpl().
4. Backbuffer in replaceSurfacedata() should be initialized by
clearRect instead of fillrect(composite is important).
Done. related to composite.
5. During lwwindowpeer initialization we call two similar methods
nativeSetNSWindowAlpha() and setAlphaValue().
nativeSetNSWindowAlpha() removed from CPlatformWindow.java.
Bug: http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=7142091
Webrev can be found at:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/7142091/webrev.00/
--
Best regards, Sergey.
Re: AWT Dev [8] Review request for 7142091: [macosx] RFE: Refactoring of peer initialization/disposing
Hi Sergey,
1. src/macosx/classes/sun/lwawt/LWComponentPeer.java
196 delegate = createDelegate();
197 if (delegate != null) {
198 delegate.setVisible(false);
The call at line 198 looks unnatural here. It looks as if the delegate
is created visible initially which isn't true, is it?
2.
204 delegate.setOpaque(true);
Related to the above comment, does this call mean that a delegate is
created non-opaque initially? I feel uncomfortable with these calls. Do
we workaround something with these calls? Can we give them more
appropriate and meaningful names then?
3. src/macosx/classes/sun/lwawt/LWWindowPeer.java
179 updateInsets(platformWindow.getInsets());
The system may report wrong insets before a window is shown on the
screen. Perhaps, instead of initializeImpl() we should introduce
preInitialize() (== current initializeImpl()), and postInitialize() (to
where this, and the subsequent replaceSurfaceData() calls might go.)
4.
220 protected void setVisibleImpl(final boolean visible) {
221 super.setVisibleImpl(visible);
Why do we remove a call to replaceSurfaceData() in the beginning of the
method?
5.
983 ((Graphics2D) g).setBackground(getBackground());
I suggest to add an instanceof check before this call.
6.
227 // invokeLater() can be deleted, but in this case we get a lag
between
228 // windows showing and content painting.
Is the lag so very noticeable? On other platforms we don't actually do
this, and I don't recall any issues about such lags.
--
best regards,
Anthony
On 5/31/2012 5:43 PM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
Hi Everyone,
Please review the fix.
Notes from the bug and comments:
1. setVisible() should be called at the end of the peers initialization.
We can move super.initialize() to the end of the peers initializations.
Initialize() was split to initialize() and initializeImpl(). In the
initialize() we call initializeImpl and then we call to setVisible().
initializeImpl overridden in subclasses.
2. Invokelater in the initialization/disposing is a tricky.
Left it as is. Probably later it will be changed. Comments was updated.
3. replaceSurfacedata() should be moved outside of
LWWindowPeer.setVisible()
Done. Also duplicate code was extracted to setVisible() method which
call setVisibleImpl().
4. Backbuffer in replaceSurfacedata() should be initialized by clearRect
instead of fillrect(composite is important).
Done. related to composite.
5. During lwwindowpeer initialization we call two similar methods
nativeSetNSWindowAlpha() and setAlphaValue().
nativeSetNSWindowAlpha() removed from CPlatformWindow.java.
Bug: http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=7142091
Webrev can be found at: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/7142091/webrev.00/
Re: AWT Dev [8] Review request for 7142091: [macosx] RFE: Refactoring of peer initialization/disposing
Hi Anthony.
Thanks for review. See comments inline.
05.06.2012 19:47, Anthony Petrov wrote:
Hi Sergey,
1. src/macosx/classes/sun/lwawt/LWComponentPeer.java
196 delegate = createDelegate();
197 if (delegate != null) {
198 delegate.setVisible(false);
The call at line 198 looks unnatural here. It looks as if the delegate
is created visible initially which isn't true, is it?
Delegate is visible by default, but our awt peer is not.
2.
204 delegate.setOpaque(true);
Related to the above comment, does this call mean that a delegate is
created non-opaque initially? I feel uncomfortable with these calls.
Do we workaround something with these calls? Can we give them more
appropriate and meaningful names then?
Most of aqua components are non opaque by default, but our awt peer not.
3. src/macosx/classes/sun/lwawt/LWWindowPeer.java
179 updateInsets(platformWindow.getInsets());
The system may report wrong insets before a window is shown on the
screen. Perhaps, instead of initializeImpl() we should introduce
preInitialize() (== current initializeImpl()), and postInitialize()
(to where this, and the subsequent replaceSurfaceData() calls might go.)
Like it was done in XAWT? It is just a nightmare. I assume that
updateInsets() should be called by some of the native callbacks, like
notifyExpose and reshape?
4.
220 protected void setVisibleImpl(final boolean visible) {
221 super.setVisibleImpl(visible);
Why do we remove a call to replaceSurfaceData() in the beginning of
the method?
Before the fix, setVisible() can be called before surface creation, but
after the fix it will be called after.
5.
983 ((Graphics2D)
g).setBackground(getBackground());
I suggest to add an instanceof check before this call.
I guess that Buffered image cannot return something except Graphics2D
6.
227 // invokeLater() can be deleted, but in this case we get
a lag between
228 // windows showing and content painting.
Is the lag so very noticeable? On other platforms we don't actually do
this, and I don't recall any issues about such lags.
Yes The difference is noticeable. So I update the comments and leave it
as is for now.
--
best regards,
Anthony
On 5/31/2012 5:43 PM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
Hi Everyone,
Please review the fix.
Notes from the bug and comments:
1. setVisible() should be called at the end of the peers
initialization. We can move super.initialize() to the end of the
peers initializations.
Initialize() was split to initialize() and initializeImpl(). In the
initialize() we call initializeImpl and then we call to setVisible().
initializeImpl overridden in subclasses.
2. Invokelater in the initialization/disposing is a tricky.
Left it as is. Probably later it will be changed. Comments was updated.
3. replaceSurfacedata() should be moved outside of
LWWindowPeer.setVisible()
Done. Also duplicate code was extracted to setVisible() method which
call setVisibleImpl().
4. Backbuffer in replaceSurfacedata() should be initialized by
clearRect instead of fillrect(composite is important).
Done. related to composite.
5. During lwwindowpeer initialization we call two similar methods
nativeSetNSWindowAlpha() and setAlphaValue().
nativeSetNSWindowAlpha() removed from CPlatformWindow.java.
Bug: http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=7142091
Webrev can be found at:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/7142091/webrev.00/
--
Best regards, Sergey.
Re: AWT Dev [8] Review request for 7142091: [macosx] RFE: Refactoring of peer initialization/disposing
The system may report wrong insets before a window is shown on the
screen. Perhaps, instead of initializeImpl() we should introduce
preInitialize() (== current initializeImpl()), and postInitialize()
(to where this, and the subsequent replaceSurfaceData() calls might go.)
In this case In current implementation it works wrong too, because it
can be called when the window initially invisible.
05.06.2012 19:47, Anthony Petrov wrote:
Hi Sergey,
1. src/macosx/classes/sun/lwawt/LWComponentPeer.java
196 delegate = createDelegate();
197 if (delegate != null) {
198 delegate.setVisible(false);
The call at line 198 looks unnatural here. It looks as if the delegate
is created visible initially which isn't true, is it?
2.
204 delegate.setOpaque(true);
Related to the above comment, does this call mean that a delegate is
created non-opaque initially? I feel uncomfortable with these calls.
Do we workaround something with these calls? Can we give them more
appropriate and meaningful names then?
3. src/macosx/classes/sun/lwawt/LWWindowPeer.java
179 updateInsets(platformWindow.getInsets());
The system may report wrong insets before a window is shown on the
screen. Perhaps, instead of initializeImpl() we should introduce
preInitialize() (== current initializeImpl()), and postInitialize()
(to where this, and the subsequent replaceSurfaceData() calls might go.)
4.
220 protected void setVisibleImpl(final boolean visible) {
221 super.setVisibleImpl(visible);
Why do we remove a call to replaceSurfaceData() in the beginning of
the method?
5.
983 ((Graphics2D)
g).setBackground(getBackground());
I suggest to add an instanceof check before this call.
6.
227 // invokeLater() can be deleted, but in this case we get
a lag between
228 // windows showing and content painting.
Is the lag so very noticeable? On other platforms we don't actually do
this, and I don't recall any issues about such lags.
--
best regards,
Anthony
On 5/31/2012 5:43 PM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
Hi Everyone,
Please review the fix.
Notes from the bug and comments:
1. setVisible() should be called at the end of the peers
initialization. We can move super.initialize() to the end of the
peers initializations.
Initialize() was split to initialize() and initializeImpl(). In the
initialize() we call initializeImpl and then we call to setVisible().
initializeImpl overridden in subclasses.
2. Invokelater in the initialization/disposing is a tricky.
Left it as is. Probably later it will be changed. Comments was updated.
3. replaceSurfacedata() should be moved outside of
LWWindowPeer.setVisible()
Done. Also duplicate code was extracted to setVisible() method which
call setVisibleImpl().
4. Backbuffer in replaceSurfacedata() should be initialized by
clearRect instead of fillrect(composite is important).
Done. related to composite.
5. During lwwindowpeer initialization we call two similar methods
nativeSetNSWindowAlpha() and setAlphaValue().
nativeSetNSWindowAlpha() removed from CPlatformWindow.java.
Bug: http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=7142091
Webrev can be found at:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~serb/7142091/webrev.00/
--
Best regards, Sergey.
