API review "RT-30861: Add simple Font factory method for a default font of a different size"

[Felipe Heidrich]

After reading all the comments I think it is best to release the code we have already (RT-30861) and file a jira for deriveFont().

Agreed ?


On Jun 3, 2013, at 12:11 PM, Phil Race wrote:

> On 6/3/2013 11:40 AM, Richard Bair wrote:
>> I agree these would be useful. The reason I filed this particular issue is that whenever I'm writing some code it seems like I'm always reaching for Font.font(size) and when I don't find it there I have to figure out what to pass as the family (it turns out I could have passed null but didn't know it, so I had the longer incantation). Having to always derive is also just an extra level of oomph that in many cases I don't really want to do.
> 
> 
> deriveFont methods are useful and interesting and eventually required, but
> came up here only to be sure that wasn't what was being asked for.
> They are somewhat more work than the simple syntactic sugar of
> font(20.0) and font("Verdana")
> 
>> 
>> Unless Font.font(size) is one day going to be "the wrong thing" and by baking it in I'm creating a new error mode, I'd just add it as it will add no weight and would at least be there when I reach for it. As long as one day it won't be "the wrong thing"…
> 
> It won't be doing the wrong thing per the proposed spec which is clear enough
>> 
>> Anyway, if it is going to take more than a few minutes to figure out, best to punt on this rather than soak up Felipe's precious time.
> 
> I think its fine.
> 
> -phil.
> 
>> 
>> Richard
>> 
>> On Jun 3, 2013, at 11:26 AM, David Grieve <david.grieve at oracle.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> I would rather see the deriveFont methods, but not as factory methods.
>>> 
>>> public Font deriveFont(double size)
>>> public Font deriveFont(String family)
>>> 
>>> The subtle difference being that these wouldn't use "default" sizes or family names but would use whatever the font is to find the closest matching font. If there isn't a close match, then the same font would be returned.
>>> 
>>> e.g.,
>>>    text.setFont(Font.getDefault().deriveFont(18));
>>> and
>>>    Font myFont = new Font("Verdana", 18);
>>>    text.setFont(myFont.deriveFont("Comic Sans MS");
>>> 
>>> On Jun 3, 2013, at 2:07 PM, Felipe Heidrich <felipe.heidrich at oracle.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Moving API discussion to the mailing:
>>>> 
>>>> Proposal:
>>>> Add:
>>>> Font#font(float)		- creates new font using default font family name and given font size
>>>> Font#font(String)		- creates new font using given font family and default font size
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Comments:
>>>> Phil Wrote
>>>>> I keep having to type this:
>>>>>  text.setFont(Font.font(Font.getDefault().getFamily(), 81));
>>>>> I would prefer just:
>>>>>  text.setFont(Font.font(81));
>>>>> which would use the default font.
>>>> I think that last line was meant to be "default font family".
>>>> All the font(..) factory methods are family based and we should
>>>> keep it that way.
>>>> So the new API Font.font(-81) as specified and implemented here
>>>> is using the default family but its not necessarily getting the same
>>>> style as the default font. Nor would it inherit any other (theoretical)
>>>> attributes of the default font. In practice it'll all work out
>>>> the same until the day that some platform has a bold default font
>>>> or has something else different about the default font that can't
>>>> be communicated solely through family.
>>>> So some day we also need to add Font.deriveFont(..).
>>>> 
>>>> Felipe wrote:
>>>> Right, the problem you pointed out would be better solved using the derive pattern:
>>>> 
>>>> Font.getDefault().deriveFont(newSize);
>>>> 
>>>> That said, the two new methods don't exclude the option of adding derive in the future.
>>>> They are consistent with the javadoc, other factory methods, and probably good enough to make Richard happy for now.
>>>> 
>>>> Anyway, I will let him be the judge for that.
>>>> 
>>>> Personally I would go with the 2 new methods for now and worried about derive in the future (at which time we can consider the implication of different style options such as stretch and advance typographic features).
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Felipe
>>>> 
>