[OpenJDK 2D-Dev] Fwd: CubicCurve2D.solveCubic and containment/intersection bugs.

[Denis Lila]

Hi Jim.

> In the meantime, I'll go ahead and push it without the tests.

When I look for 7016856 in bugs.sun.com, nothing comes up. Should
I push anyway?

----- Original Message -----
> > Then that would be a problem. We'll have to figure out how to make
> > them fail benignly if not run on a specific build (i.e. don't use
> > internal rendering APIs). I'd hold off on putting these back for
> > now...
> 
> I see. Ok, I'll think about a way to fix this. Perhaps before running
> each test we could check that the implementation class we want exists
> and is visible to us and if not simply print a warning?
> 

> 
> Thank you,
> Denis.
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> 
> >
> > ...jim
> >
> > On 2/4/2011 6:02 AM, Denis Lila wrote:
> > >> Do these also pass closed JDK? So far I don't know of any way to
> > >> identify a test as "Open Rasterizer only"...
> > >
> > > I don't think so. When I run it with closed source java it
> > > complains about no PathConsumer2D.
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > >
> > >>
> > >> ...jim
> > >>
> > >> On 2/3/2011 5:59 PM, Denis Lila wrote:
> > >>> Hi Jim.
> > >>>
> > >>>> The code changes look good to go.
> > >>>
> > >>> Nice! Thanks.
> > >>>
> > >>>> I'm guessing there is no regression test for this as it is
> > >>>> entirely
> > >>>> performance. If this fixes any quality or correctness bugs it
> > >>>> would
> > >>>> be
> > >>>> nice to develop an automated test case to go back with it, but
> > >>>> if
> > >>>> it
> > >>>> is
> > >>>> just performance then they don't usually have tests...
> > >>>
> > >>> This changeset would be entirely performance and I don't have a
> > >>> test
> > >>> for it. I do however have a few regression tests that I would
> > >>> like
> > >>> to
> > >>> push. They're already in icedtea:
> > >>> http://icedtea.classpath.org/hg/icedtea6/file/12df222ab029/patches/rendering-engine-tests.patch
> > >>> One of them doesn't have a sun bugid, so we should probably just
> > >>> skip it.
> > >>> I'm not sure how we would include them, since they all test bugs
> > >>> that
> > >>> have already been fixed.
> > >>>
> > >>> Regards,
> > >>> Denis.