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

[Anthony Petrov]

Hi Dmitriy,

Robot.sync() could also sound confusing if one remembers there's 
Toolkit.sync() already.

Why not name it waitForNativeIdle(), analogous to the already existing 
Robot.waitForIdle()? The methods perform similar actions, the only 
difference is the event queue they perform these actions on. If we 
choose this name, then the javadoc could be copied almost verbatim from 
the waitForIdle() method with a few additional "native" words inserted 
here and there.

In general, I'm fine with this approach of resolving this issue.

--
best regards,
Anthony

On 9/4/2014 3:25 PM, Dmitriy Ermashov wrote:
> 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
>>>
>>
>