The fix looks good to me.
Thanks,
Alexandr.
On 7/27/2015 4:32 PM, Semyon Sadetsky wrote:
Alexander,
you can run the next test on Windows which sets the right frame size
and see that it fails because of the negative size.
import javax.swing.*;
import javax.swing.border.EmptyBorder;
import java.awt.*;
public class bug8001470 {
private static JFrame frame;
private static JTextField textField1;
private static JTextField textField2;
public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {
SwingUtilities.invokeAndWait(new Runnable() {
@Override
public void run() {
frame = new JFrame("JTextField Test");
frame.setDefaultCloseOperation(JFrame.EXIT_ON_CLOSE);
JPanel container = (JPanel) frame.getContentPane();
container.setLayout(new GridLayout(2,1));
textField1 = new JTextField("\u0e01");
textField2 = new JTextField("\u0c01");
JPanel panel = new JPanel();
BorderLayout mgr = new BorderLayout();
panel.setLayout(mgr);
container.add(panel);
panel.setBorder(new EmptyBorder(100, 100, 100, 100));
panel.add(textField1);
panel.add(textField2);
frame.setVisible(true);
frame.pack();
}
});
if( textField1.getHeight() < 10 || textField2.getHeight() < 10 )
throw new Exception("Wrong field height");
System.out.println("ok");
SwingUtilities.invokeLater(new Runnable() {
@Override
public void run() {
frame.dispose();
}
});
}
}
--Semyon
On 7/27/2015 2:52 PM, Semyon Sadetsky wrote:
-Alexander Yarmoliskiy
+Alexander Zvegintsev
On 7/27/2015 2:36 PM, Semyon Sadetsky wrote:
It is probably an issue, but even if fix it we cannot guarantee that
insets will be always less then the resulting frame size. Method
guessInsets() which obtains insets in frame's peer is hinting.
And again layout manager is able to apply negative size to container
regardless the frame size.
--Semyon
On 7/27/2015 1:38 PM, Alexander Scherbatiy wrote:
I see that sun.awt.X11.WindowDimensions class takes insets into
account and sets window size bigger than insets size. It looks like
difference between windows size and insets should be positive in
this case.
Thanks,
Alexandr.
On 7/27/2015 9:56 AM, Semyon Sadetsky wrote:
Your expectation is not correct because if insets are set for a
container then its child components can receive negative size even
if the parent size is positive.
--Semyon
On 7/24/2015 7:09 PM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
On 23.07.15 16:06, Semyon Sadetsky wrote:
Peer validation doesn't make any sense until layout manager may
easily set negative size for any component using
Component.setBounds(). That happens this issue particularly.
In your first request you mention that the problem occurs when
"On Linux and Solaris platforms the initial frame window width
and height can be negative".
My expectation is that: if the window size if >=0 then none of
the layout managers should set negative value for width/height, no?
So we need either to introduce the size constraint and fix the
general issue either make UI to be prepared to get negative size
occasionally i.e. fix the particular case (what is done in the
solution).
Which option are you suggesting?
--Semyon
On 7/23/2015 2:06 PM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
On 23.07.15 9:22, Semyon Sadetsky wrote:
O.K. It sounds like a generic rule. Can I add this constant to
the Component.reshape()?
Historically our components have a lack of any data validation
because the user was able to call peers methods directly. I
assume that such validation should exists already in the peers
classes(like XBaseWindow.xSetBounds()).
--Semyon
On 7/22/2015 3:40 PM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
It seems that the bug is in fact that the size of the window
is negative. In a lot of place we assume that it should be >=0.
On 22.07.15 14:28, Semyon Sadetsky wrote:
In setVisible(true) if size is not specified and pack has
not been called yet frame get some initial size depending on
the platform.
That is the purpose of the test : to call pack() after
setVisible().
--Semyon
On 7/22/2015 2:03 PM, Alexander Scherbatiy wrote:
On 7/17/2015 5:32 PM, Semyon Sadetsky wrote:
Hello,
Please review fix for JDK9:
bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8130892
webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ssadetsky/8130892/webrev.00/
On Linux and Solaris platforms the initial frame window
width and height can be negative. So the root view is
initialization trigger was updated to take negative values
into account. The fix was tested on Ubuntu 12, OEL7 and
Solaris 11.
It looks strange that the test which does not set
explicit bounds and calls frame.pack() encounters into
negative sizes.
In which place does the frame window obtain negative
width and height?
Thanks,
Alexandr.
--Semyon
