<AWT Dev> [OpenJDK 2D-Dev] [9] Review Request: JDK-8029455 JLightweightFrame: support scaled painting

[Sergey Bylokhov]

On 5/13/14 9:29 PM, Anthony Petrov wrote:
> Hi Jim, Sergey, and Anton,
>
> I'd like to revive this old thread and finally push this fix, which 
> has been reviewed and approved on this mailing list back in February. 
> The only additional change that I want to introduce, is the addition 
> of default implementations for the 
> LightweightContent.imageBufferReset() methods. This allows clients of 
> the API (namely, JavaFX) to run with both the old and the new JDK w/o 
> any changes or side-effects. Here's the updated webrev:
Please do not push it, i'll try to decrease the changes. Will send an 
update tomorrow.
>
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~anthony/9-2-hiDPISwingNode-8029455.0/
>
> It literally only adds the default methods and doesn't make any other 
> changes to the rest of the already reviewed code. I've tested this on 
> both hiDPI and loDPI displays, with both old and hiDPI-aware JavaFX 
> builds, and it works fine in all the cases.
>
> The current plan is to push this fix to JDK 9, and then back-port the 
> changes to 8u20.
>
> -- 
> best regards,
> Anthony
>
> On 2/21/2014 2:47 AM, Jim Graham wrote:
>> Yes, approved.
>>
>>          ...jim
>>
>> On 2/17/14 6:09 AM, Anton V. Tarasov wrote:
>>> Jim, so this is ready for a push then.
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>> Anton.
>>>
>>> On 15.02.2014 5:01, Jim Graham wrote:
>>>> I don't need to see an update for that.  I didn't read the entire
>>>> webrev, but I looked at this one piece of code and if that was the
>>>> only thing changed then I think that dealt with the outstanding
>>>> issues...
>>>>
>>>>         ...jim
>>>>
>>>> On 2/13/14 11:12 PM, Anton V. Tarasov wrote:
>>>>> On 14.02.2014 2:52, Jim Graham wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2/13/14 5:03 AM, Anton V. Tarasov wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi Jim,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please, look at the update:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ant/JDK-8029455/webrev.5
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Here I'm correcting the rect after the transform in SG2D:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2123         // In case of negative scale transform, reflect the 
>>>>>>> rect
>>>>>>> coords.
>>>>>>> 2124         if (w < 0) {
>>>>>>> 2125             w *= -1;
>>>>>>> 2126             x -= w;
>>>>>>> 2127         }
>>>>>>> 2128         if (h < 0) {
>>>>>>> 2129             h *= -1;
>>>>>>> 2130             y -= h;
>>>>>>> 2131         }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The blit direction (dx, dy) remains transformed. Is this the right
>>>>>>> behavior from your perspective?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, that looks good.  I wonder if the "w *= -1" results in a 
>>>>>> multiply
>>>>>> byte code whereas "w = -w" would avoid the multiply?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>             ...jim
>>>>>
>>>>> Jim,
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, this indeed results in different byte code instructions (imult &
>>>>> ineg). Just for curiosity I did some measuring which showed
>>>>> negatioation
>>>>> worked 10% faster :)
>>>>> Well, I'll fix it but let me please not send an update...
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>> Anton.
>>>>>
>>>


-- 
Best regards, Sergey.