[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       openjdk-swing-dev
Subject:    Re: <Swing Dev> Review request for 8133039 Provide public API to sun.swing.UIAction#isEnabled(Object
From:       Alexander Scherbatiy <alexandr.scherbatiy () oracle ! com>
Date:       2015-12-09 15:57:41
Message-ID: 5668E9F8.4070101 () oracle ! com
[Download RAW message or body]


Hello,

Could you review the updated fix:
   http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~alexsch/8133039/webrev.03

The javadoc for the Action.accept(Object sender) method is updated to 
mention
the method behavior for the null sender.

Thanks,
Alexandr.


On 25/11/15 17:23, Alexander Zvegintsev wrote:
> +1
>
> Thanks,
>
> Alexander.
>
> On 11/24/2015 04:54 PM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
>> Looks fine.
>>
>> On 20.11.15 17:01, Alexander Scherbatiy wrote:
>>>
>>>   Hello,
>>>
>>>   Could you review the updated fix:
>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~alexsch/8133039/webrev.02/
>>>
>>>   The description that accept() method must return false for the
>>> disabled action is added.
>>>
>>>   Thanks,
>>>   Alexandr.
>>>
>>> On 11/19/2015 6:40 PM, Sergey Bylokhov wrote:
>>>> Probably we should strictly specify relationship between the accept
>>>> and isEnabled?
>>>>     My assumption that the accept should always return false in case
>>>> of disabled Action. And related issue after we open part of UIAction
>>>> is that UIAction ignores the setEnabled() and actually contradicts the
>>>> specification of the parent. SO this can mislead the user, that the
>>>> accept can return true after setEnabled(false).
>>>>
>>>> On 11.11.15 16:59, Andrej Golovnin wrote:
>>>>> Hi Alexander,
>>>>>
>>>>>>     You are right.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>    There is the updated fix there the sender type is Object:
>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~alexsch/8133039/webrev.01
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> this one looks good for me.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>> Andrej Golovnin
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]