On 18.03.16 15:37, Semyon Sadetsky wrote:
On 3/17/2016 2:46 PM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
Small notes:
 - It will be good to move the code which reads the system properties
to the static init block, otherwise we can be in trouble if these
properties will be changed at runtime.
I don't' see any troubles with this. Can you describe the scenario you
meant?
I think the properties changing at run-time is useful because it gives
better control over GTK load. For example, developer may change the
order to GTK3->GTK2.

Yes the users can change the property at the beginning of the program or via command line, but it is not good thing to allow to change it after unix toolkit is loaded. For example isNativeGTKAvailable() can check one version of the library, and loadGTK() can try to load another version, because getEnabledGtkVersion() will return different values. It belongs to all places where getEnabledGtkVersion() is used.

 - Is it necessary to use ordinal? can we replace it with some
specific data?(the same for the indexed access in .values()[..])
In general I'm good. But what specific data you propose?

And javadoc for ordinal:
"Most programmers will have no use for this method. It is designed for use by sophisticated enum-based data structures, such as EnumSet and EnumMap."

Quote from the internet:
"This is not recommended to use ordinal() (Effective Java, Item 31) as it relies on the order of the enum values in client's code determine the ordinal, and any change could lead to bad values being mapped.

Instead, it would be better to have users implement a method that would return a unique ID for an enum value. For instance, with an Identifiable interface that has a unique method id(), that the user would have to implement for every enum value."


--Semyon

On 16.03.16 20:52, Semyon Sadetsky wrote:
Hi Phil,

Thank for review. You will find my reply below in the text.

The updated webrev is
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ssadetsky/8145547/webrev.01/
It also contains:
- new properties jdk.gtk.version and jdk.gtk.verbose
- appearance tuning for Ubuntu 15 (GTK 3.14). It may require more but we
can do this later as a separate bug.
The main implementation was done for Ubuntu 14.05 LTS (GTK 3.10) and
then tuned for OEL 7 (GTK 3.8). Each minor GTK version may have some
appearance changes.

On 3/15/2016 10:39 PM, Phil Race wrote:
There is a lot to read here. I think I need to patch and try it but
first ...

Two high level questions :
1) Have you verified that this behaves properly (or no worse than
currently) with -Djava.awt.headless=true since Swing components
are supposed to be able to draw off-screen in headless mode .. and
yet a dependency on GTK and its dependency on xlibraries seems to mean
that you can't load GTK in this case.
BTW I think it may be painful to get them to layout in such a case
but that's another issue.
I tested it by painting to a BufferedImage. Seems it is enough.

2) Have you tried a hi-dpi system ?
Yes I have. It is identical to the existing GTK2 based appearance.

3) Have you submitted a JPRT job ? It is essential to know that this
builds cleanly on the "official" compilation environment.
I will do this before the push. I think it will be OK because I did not
use any new C constructs and the new libraries are linked dynamically.
4)I expect you ran Swingset2 + GTK L&F but have you run any of the
regression test suite ?
Yes I ran javax/swing tests but many of them fails with GTK2 as well.
With GTK3 the result was the same except for some unstable tests. Unity
desktop has new window decorations like borderless windows which are
resized by dragging the outer window shadow, invisible overlay
scrollbars, etc. Many tests written for old window decorations fails.

Minor comments :

GTKEngine.java

 494         Container parent = context.getComponent().getParent();
 495         if(GTKLookAndFeel.is3()) {
 496             if (parent != null && parent.getParent() instanceof
JComboBox) {
 497                 if (parent.getParent().hasFocus()) {
 498                     synthState |= SynthConstants.FOCUSED;
 499                 }
 500             }
 501         }

GTKPainter.java

746         if (GTKLookAndFeel.is3()) {
 747             if (slider.getOrientation() == JSlider.VERTICAL) {
 748                 y += 1;
 749                 h -= 2;
 750             } else {
 751                 x += 1;
 752                 w -= 2;
 753             }
 754         }

I don't know where these numbers come from or what coordinate system
is being used here but it seems you are changing them for gtk 2.2 as
well as 3
Can you speak to this ?
It is an appearance tuning for GTK3. I didn't change it for GTK2, why do
you think so?
This was used before my fix as well, for example

                     if (containerParent instanceof JComboBox) {
                         x += (focusSize + 2);
                         y += (focusSize + 1);
                         w -= (2 * focusSize + 1);
                         h -= (2 * focusSize + 2);
                     } else {
                         x += focusSize;
                         y += focusSize;
                         w -= 2 * focusSize;
                         h -= 2 * focusSize;
                     }

The only place where I changed the existing GTK2 appearance is:

1121         CLASS_SPECIFIC_MAP.put("Slider.thumbWidth",
"slider-length");

  in GTKStyle.java, because this property was omitted by mistake.

GTKStyle.java

735         if(!GTKLookAndFeel.is3()) {

840      } else if(GTKLookAndFeel.is3() &&
"ComboBox.forceOpaque".equals(key)) {


we prefer a space between "if" and "("
Accepted.

sun_awt_X11_GtkFileDialogPeer.c

 392     if (gtk->gtk_check_version(2, 8, 0) == NULL) {


Maybe I am not looking at the right fn but I thought I saw
this fn return a boolean so a check against NULL looks wrong.
The declaration is in GtkApi struct of gtk_interface.h. It returns
char*. NULL means that the version is compatible.

 393
gtk->gtk_file_chooser_set_do_overwrite_confirmation(GTK_FILE_CHOOSER(
 394                 dialog), TRUE);


You didn't add this but it is awfully specific about the GTK version
and
I wonder if this test is doing what it should be doing on GTK 3?
Accepted.

It is interesting that some equivalent looking Java level dialog
checking in XToolkit.java
checked for 3.0 too ..

swing_GTKEngine.c :

  30 /* Static buffer for conversion from java.lang.String to UTF-8 */
  31 static char convertionBuffer[CONV_BUFFER_SIZE];

So the variable name should be spelt conversionBuffer.
Accepted.

awt_UNIXToolkit.c

< 287 free(ret);

You deleted this free(). Is that correct ? It seems to imply
you now expect a boolean return as discussed above and
so in that case NULL looks odd here (line 260) too.
The JNI exported method returns boolean while the GTK method returns
char*. free() is deleted intentionally according to the GTK docs it
belongs to the library and should not be freed by user code.

gtk3_interface.h :

  36 #define G_PI 3.1415926535897932384626433832795028841971693993751

I don't think that is completely accurate :-) And I should have
reviewed this yesterday [1].
:) This is glib's definition I just copied.

--Semyon

-phil.

[1] http://www.piday.org/


On 03/05/2016 01:14 PM, Semyon Sadetsky wrote:
Hello,

Please review fix for JDK9:

bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8145547
webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ssadetsky/8145547/webrev.00/

The fix contains GTK3 based implementation for Swing GTK LnF, AWT
FileChooser for Linux and AWT Robot for Linux.
Also the new system property is added to request specific GTK version
swing.gtk.version.

--Semyon







--
Best regards, Sergey.

Reply via email to