RFR: 8288325: [windows] Actual and Preferred Size of AWT Non-resizable frame are different [v4]

[Alexey Ivanov]

On Mon, 19 Sep 2022 23:24:45 GMT, Harshitha Onkar <honkar at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> On Windows, the insets obtained for a Non-Resizable AWT Frame was different when frame.pack() was called and subsequent call to frame.getInsets() or frame.getPreferredSize(). Due to this, the actual and preferred size differed when frame.pack() was called for Non-Resizable frame (on Windows).  
>> 
>> Earlier the insets returned when frame.getInsets() was called, was that of a Resizable frame and not the correct insets associated with Non-Resizable frame. Fix is added to native code to get the correct insets. The test - AwtFramePackTest.java has been updated to test actual and expected/preferred size for both Resizable and Non-Resizable Frames.
>> 
>> The test is generic though the issue and fix is on Windows platform because the condition 
>> `frame.getSize() == frame.getPreferredSize()` should be true on all platforms when frame.pack() is called.
>> 
>> Following is the link to Windows System Metrics (used for native insets) - https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/winuser/nf-winuser-getsystemmetrics
>
> Harshitha Onkar has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   reverted the changes related to previous fix - checking the type of target object

Marked as reviewed by aivanov (Reviewer).

src/java.desktop/windows/native/libawt/windows/awt_Window.cpp line 1411:

> 1409: 
> 1410:     if (m_insets.left < 0 || m_insets.top < 0 ||
> 1411:         m_insets.right < 0 || m_insets.bottom < 0) {

No strong opinion here, yet I'd rather leave these lines unchanged. Having the opening brace on its own line avoids the confusion between the condition and the code in the body; on the other hand, it starts with a comment which visually separates the condition from the code inside the if-block.

src/java.desktop/windows/native/libawt/windows/awt_Window.cpp line 1419:

> 1417:                 ::GetSystemMetrics(SM_CXSIZEFRAME) + extraPaddedBorderInsets;
> 1418:             m_insets.top = m_insets.bottom =
> 1419:                 ::GetSystemMetrics(SM_CYSIZEFRAME) + extraPaddedBorderInsets;

Is it worth adding a comment clarifying why the style isn't checked? Maybe not, since now it's gone from the code. On the other hand, a reader may wonder why we always uses the sizing frame insets even for non-resizeable frames.

-------------

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/9954