Hi Kevin & Jim,
this plan looks good for me.
> Thanks for the summary. We should proceed as you outlined. Can you file a
> new RFE (Enhancement) to integrate Marlin into JavaFX as an optional
> rasterizer (disabled by default) so we have a clean JBS issue to use for
> the JDK 9 feature extension
FX enhancement: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8169270
...jim
On 11/4/2016 8:21 AM, Kevin Rushforth wrote:
Hi Jim,
Thanks for the summary. We should proceed as you outlined. Can you file
a new RFE (Enhancement) to integrate Marlin into JavaFX as an optional
ra
On 11/4/2016 11:33 AM, Laurent Bourgès wrote:
For SWContext, I figured out that only openpisces.* classes were used
directly via imports (hardcoded) so I left it unchanged. So you propose
to generalize use of marlin or native pisces ?
I didn't notice that, I was just searching on the use of
"d
Jim,
I agree your proposals on ShapeUtil and prism settings.
Will do it in next webrev after cleanup and OpenJDK9 synchro, certainly
happening during this week end.
> I also noticed that the SWContext also chooses a rasterizer for its use
using a copy of the decision logic in ShapeUtils. We shou
Hi Jim,
Thanks for the summary. We should proceed as you outlined. Can you file
a new RFE (Enhancement) to integrate Marlin into JavaFX as an optional
rasterizer (disabled by default) so we have a clean JBS issue to use for
the JDK 9 feature extension request, rather than using JDK-8092373? Yo
Hi Kevin,
Please review the below simple fix.
JIRA: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8169204
Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mbilla/8169204/webrev.00/
Thanks,
Murali
