<AWT Dev> Review Request for 8056911: Remove internal API usage from ExtendedRobot class

[Dmitriy Ermashov]

Ok, I've prepared an updated version of patch
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dermashov/8056911/webrev.01/
Please, review new version.

I've moved a method implementation to Robot class. We've decided that 
adding new method to Toolkit class with similar to sync() method 
functionality but with a different name could hardly look elegant, and 
besides, new solution could be less conspicuous.

Thanks,
Dima

On 09/01/2014 04:49 PM, Yuri Nesterenko wrote:
> Phil,
>
> perhaps javadoc should be changed, yes.
> It is the first public spec for Dmitriy.
>
> As to the narrow purpose, are you serious?
> We have nothing to replace this invention. Original idea
> was to replace Toolkit.sync() with realSync() but
> after JDK-6252005 Denis left us, there was no resources
> and no hard demand to avoid the internal API.
> Now it is here. Demand is here, not resources. Are you going
> to design and implement something new to help SQE?
>
> -yan
>
> On 08/29/2014 07:33 PM, Phil Race wrote:
>> So you are proposing adding a new *public* API for this narrow purpose.
>> And it calls out a whole bunch of internal classes in its apI doc !?!
>>
>> 2642      * <p> The method calls {@link sun.awt.SunToolkit#realSync} to
>> 2643      * sync with native event queue
>>
>> @throws  sun.awt.SunToolkit.IllegalThreadException if called on the 
>> AWT event
>> 2646      *          dispatching thread
>> 2647      * @throws  sun.awt.SunToolkit.OperationTimedOut if the
>> 2648      *          {@link sun.awt.SunToolkit.OperationTimedOut} 
>> exception occurs in
>> 2649      *          {@link sun.awt.SunToolkit#realSync}
>> 2650      * @throws  sun.awt.SunToolkit.InfiniteLoop if the
>> 2651      *          {@link sun.awt.SunToolkit.InfiniteLoop} 
>> exception occurs in
>> 2652      *          {@link sun.awt.SunToolkit#realSync}
>> 2653      * @throws  ClassCastException if default toolkit is not 
>> SunToolkit
>>
>>
>> I am also not sure how confident I am that the statement
>>
>> his method guarantees that after
>> 2637      * return no additional Java events will be generated, unless
>> 2638      * cause by user.
>>
>> is actually guaranteed.
>>
>>
>> My initial reaction to such a proposal is instead look hard for a better
>> way even if it means re-writing all the tests.
>> There's also the proposed 'jdk.*' name space that can be considered
>> but re-writing the tests would be better.
>>
>> -phil.
>>
>> On 8/29/14 8:11 AM, Dmitriy Ermashov wrote:
>>> Hi awt team,
>>>
>>> Please review a fix for 8056911, remove internal API usage from
>>> ExtendedRobot class.
>>> We have to throw out all calls of sun.* packages from tests because of
>>> incompatibility with Jigsaw project.
>>>
>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dermashov/8056911/webrev.00/
>>>
>>> The CCC request will take place after the review process will be
>>> completed.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Dima
>>
>