harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alexey Petrenko" <alexey.a.petre...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [classlib][awt] clipping area
Date Thu, 14 Dec 2006 11:36:51 GMT
Thank you guys.

The issue has been closed as invalid.

SY, Alexey

2006/12/14, Oleg Khaschansky <oleg.v.khaschansky@gmail.com>:
> > Can you please add this as a comment to the issue.
> Done.
>
> On 12/13/06, Alexey Petrenko <alexey.a.petrenko@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Can you please add this as a comment to the issue. And I'll close it.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > SY, Alexey
> >
> > 2006/12/13, Oleg Khaschansky <oleg.v.khaschansky@gmail.com>:
> > > > Because I'm not sure that MultuRectArea is fully implemented shape. We
> > > > have special handling for it everywhere.
> > >
> > > It is implemented. But you are absolutely right, MultiRectArea is a
> > > special case! I created a Shape with the same implementation as
> > > MultiRectArea has but with the different class name (to avoid entering
> > > the MRA-specific code on instanceof checks) and used it instead of
> > > MultiRectArea in this test. And Harmony demonstrated the same behavior
> > > as RI.
> > >
> > > So, the reason is that MultiRectArea class is handled in a special way
> > > in Harmony. It is not a bug then.
> > >
> > > On 12/13/06, Alexey Petrenko <alexey.a.petrenko@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > 2006/12/13, Oleg Khaschansky <oleg.v.khaschansky@gmail.com>:
> > > > > Hmm, I don't think that things are so simple. Everyone can implement
> > > > > their own Shape and MultiRectArea is simply a Shape implementation.
So
> > > > > the testcase with it is pretty legal, why not?
> > > > Because I'm not sure that MultuRectArea is fully implemented shape. We
> > > > have special handling for it everywhere.
> > > >
> > > > SY, Alexey
> > > >
> > > > > But we know that RI demonstrates a different behavior if we pass
the
> > > > > same clip rect as a Rectangle and as a MultiRectArea. Taking this
into
> > > > > account I'd say that RI behavior is inconsistent.
> > > > >
> > > > > On the other hand, we don't have pixel-by-pixel compatibility with
RI
> > > > > in java2d, e.g. I think, we use different shape rasterization
> > > > > algorythms.
> > > > >
> > > > > I'd suggest to close this bug as a non-bug difference.
> > > > >
> > > > > On 12/13/06, Shipilov, Alexander D <alexander.d.shipilov@intel.com>
wrote:
> > > > > > >Why do you need Area here? You can use Rectangle alone.
> > > > > > Yes I can. I can also use setClip without even Rectangle:
> > > > > > setClip(10, 10, 2, 10);
> > > > > > But I did it for 1:1 correspondence with original test :)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > Alexander Shipilov
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >-----Original Message-----
> > > > > > >From: Alexey Petrenko [mailto:alexey.a.petrenko@gmail.com]
> > > > > > >Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2006 5:05 PM
> > > > > > >To: dev@harmony.apache.org
> > > > > > >Subject: Re: [classlib][awt] clipping area
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >2006/12/13, Shipilov, Alexander D <alexander.d.shipilov@intel.com>:
> > > > > > >> >I think that it is better to use java.awt.Rectangle
here.
> > > > > > >> >Please add your modified test case with the results
to JIRA.
> > > > > > >> Sure, it is :). I meant that I used it both:
> > > > > > >>        Area area = new Area(new Rectangle(10, 10, 2,
10));
> > > > > > >Why do you need Area here? You can use Rectangle alone.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >SY, Alexey
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> >-----Original Message-----
> > > > > > >> >From: Alexey Petrenko [mailto:alexey.a.petrenko@gmail.com]
> > > > > > >> >Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2006 4:57 PM
> > > > > > >> >To: dev@harmony.apache.org
> > > > > > >> >Subject: Re: [classlib][awt] clipping area
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> >2006/12/13, Shipilov, Alexander D <alexander.d.shipilov@intel.com>:
> > > > > > >> >> Thank you, it is very appropriate action!
> > > > > > >> >> So, if we change MultiRectArea for a class
Area from public API,
> > > > > > >> Harmony
> > > > > > >> >> works the same as RI.
> > > > > > >> >I think that it is better to use java.awt.Rectangle
here.
> > > > > > >> >Please add your modified testcase with the results
to JIRA.
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> >> Is that means that bug
> > > > > > >> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-2032
> > > > > > >> >> is incorrect and we should close it?
> > > > > > >> >If it is not reproducible with public API this
bug is incorrect,
> > > > > > IMHO.
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> >SY, Alexey
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> >> >-----Original Message-----
> > > > > > >> >> >From: Alexey Petrenko [mailto:alexey.a.petrenko@gmail.com]
> > > > > > >> >> >Sent: Wednesday, December 13, 2006 4:13
PM
> > > > > > >> >> >To: dev@harmony.apache.org
> > > > > > >> >> >Subject: Re: [classlib][awt] clipping
area
> > > > > > >> >> >
> > > > > > >> >> >Test case from this issue uses Harmony
specific class
> > > > > > >> >> >org.apache.harmony.awt.gl.MultiRectArea.
I'm not sure how it was
> > > > > > >> >> >integrated to RI and does it work ok on
RI.
> > > > > > >> >> >
> > > > > > >> >> >I think that first of all this test should
be modified to use
> > > > > > only
> > > > > > >> >> public
> > > > > > >> >> >API.
> > > > > > >> >> >
> > > > > > >> >> >SY, Alexey
> > > > > > >> >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Mime
View raw message