[rfc][icedtea-web] rewritten java console

[Andrew Azores]

On 12/19/2013 08:12 AM, Jiri Vanek wrote:
>
> hi!
>
> Here is the patch adapted to newest head (especially to config 
> singleton). It is also applied on top of "[rfc] [icedtea-web] 
> singletons logic, logs and test cleanup/fixes" which are necessary to 
> make the stuff running correctly.
>
>
> There are practicaly only htree differences:
>   - gui of console is created when console is shown
>   - the headers have defaults like "unkknown", as wrongly parsed 
> plugin message could cause npe otherwise
>   - the initialisation of log x config get a bit connected, see 
> getConfiguration() method change:
>
> --- a/netx/net/sourceforge/jnlp/runtime/JNLPRuntime.java    Wed Dec 18 
> 17:46:52 2013 +0100
> +++ b/netx/net/sourceforge/jnlp/runtime/JNLPRuntime.java    Thu Dec 19 
> 14:00:34 2013 +0100
> @@ -365,6 +365,21 @@
> OutputController.getLogger().log(OutputController.Level.MESSAGE_ALL, 
> getMessage("RConfigurationError"));
>                  //mark this exceptionas we can die on it later
>                  config.setLoadingException(ex);
> +            } finally{
> +                new Thread(){
> +                    /*
> +                     * this is crucial. The creation of output logger 
> itself do not need config
> +                     * however processing of messages do. Also 
> loading of properties do log.
> +                     * So the start of processing MUST be done AFTER 
> config is
> +                     * initialised, and in fresh, non waiting thread.
> +                     */
> +                    @Override
> +                    public void run() {
> + OutputController.getLogger().startConsumer();
> +                    }
> +
> +                }.start();
> +
>              }
>          }
>          retur
>
>
>
>
> I'm in favour to post those two patches  as much as they are, and let 
> the code evolve....
>
> J.

Overall I'm happy with this patch as it is. Just one nit/question: 
ConsoleOutputPane now has a "defaultActionSingleton". I am much happier 
with this than having 10 000 anonymous inner classes :) but, should an 
ActionListener be reused like this? I don't know too much about GUI 
stuff so this is not criticism, just a genuine question. It seems to me 
like maybe each thing should have its own ActionListener 
instance/reference rather than all shared... ? Even if they all do the 
same thing. But like I said, I really don't know about this. Other than 
that, why have default visibility on defaultActionSingleton and give it 
a private getter?


Thanks,

-- 
Andrew A