Re: [10] Review Request: 5031664 Increase thread safety of EventListenerList

2017-11-09 Thread Andrej Golovnin
Hi Sergey, the order of modifiers is wrong. It should be "protected transient volatile". See http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~alundblad/styleguide/index-v6.html#toc-modifiers for details. Best regards, Andrej Golovnin On Fri, Oct 27, 2017 at 1:18 AM, Sergey Bylokhov

Re: [10] Review Request: 5031664 Increase thread safety of EventListenerList

2017-11-09 Thread Alexander Zvegintsev
looks fine to me. Thanks, Alexander. On 10/27/2017 04:48 AM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote: Hello, Please review the fix for jdk10. The EventListenerList class was implemented to be thread safe. To achieve the correct state of the object:  - two mutators(add/remove) were marked as synchronized.  -

Re: [10] Review request for 8190228: Remove redundant modifiers in java.desktop module.

2017-11-09 Thread Sergey Bylokhov
Looks fine. On 07/11/2017 08:27, Semyon Sadetsky wrote: Hello, Please review fix for JDK10: bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8190228 webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ssadetsky/8190228/webrev.00/ The fix cleanups Swing and AWT code to remove the redundant code like:

Re: Questionable Rendering of Disabled Text

2017-11-09 Thread Phil Race
No need this time but in future file it at http://bugreport.java.com/ ... those go into the same JIRA instance as JBS and just get moved after verification -phil. On 11/9/2017 1:35 PM, Michael D wrote: Hi Phil, Not an OpenJDk dev so unable to file bug reports or webrevs. Thanks for looking

Re: Questionable Rendering of Disabled Text

2017-11-09 Thread Michael D
Hi Phil, Not an OpenJDk dev so unable to file bug reports or webrevs. Thanks for looking at the patch and filing a report. Michael On Fri, 10 Nov 2017 at 05:52, Phil Race wrote: > Protocol is that there first be a bug report and then a "RFR" (request > for review) is

Re: Questionable Rendering of Disabled Text

2017-11-09 Thread Phil Race
Protocol is that there first be a bug report and then a "RFR" (request for review) is sent to the list referencing the bug + the fix I have filed https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8191041 and verified that it works. So we can perhaps short-circuit that this time .. but not next time ..

Re: [10] Review request for 8182043: Access to Windows Large Icons

2017-11-09 Thread Phil Race
This thread is very long and despite trying I am sure I have not absorbed every discussion point to date. I think a concise summary of the current opinions from Semyon would help as I don't yet see a concensus emerging and if we are adding a new public API we need to be sure that 1) It is

Re: [10] RFR JDK-8187957:Tab Size does not work correctly in JTextArea

2017-11-09 Thread Semyon Sadetsky
Hi Prasanta, On 11/09/2017 01:56 AM, Prasanta Sadhukhan wrote: I guess by "manual implementation", Sergey was mentioning about programmer doing the calculation rather than using system api to do the job for us. Anyway, I saw using Math.ceil and no "nTabs+1", alignment does not work This is

Re: [10] RFR JDK-8187957:Tab Size does not work correctly in JTextArea

2017-11-09 Thread Sergey Bylokhov
On 09/11/2017 01:56, Prasanta Sadhukhan wrote: So, I guess, as Semyon suggested, making the "result of the sentence should be  truncated to int, not its members" should be the way to go. Thank you for clarification, then this solution looks fine. Lastly, could you please suggest as to how

Re: [10] RFR JDK-8187957:Tab Size does not work correctly in JTextArea

2017-11-09 Thread Prasanta Sadhukhan
I guess by "manual implementation", Sergey was mentioning about programmer doing the calculation rather than using system api to do the job for us. Anyway, I saw using Math.ceil and no "nTabs+1", alignment does not work This is because For ex, if x = 66.0, tabSize = 48.0, tabBase = 0, then