[RT-33954] static block...causes IllegalStateException - re-open?

[Kevin Rushforth]

I can't speak to other IntelliJ issues, but the root cause of this 
particular one is the same thing that Debbie ran into last week -- 
IntelliJ doesn't launch programs using the standard Java launcher. For 
whatever reason, it uses its own launcher. This might be worth raising 
with JetBrains.

-- Kevin


Jonathan Giles wrote:
> Kevin,
>
> Yes, that is the program I used, and yes, I get the 'Toolkit not 
> initialized' exception. I am running IntelliJ, so that is the reason. 
> I switched over to Eclipse and the code run as expected.
>
> I am slightly bothered by the occasional failures that seem to be 
> IntelliJ-specific. I have a gut feeling that it doesn't always run all 
> tests (or that it runs them slightly differently to get different 
> results than when run on the command line). Does anyone know why this is?
>
> I'm actually most at home in Eclipse, so perhaps I should switch to 
> that as my primary IDE for OpenJFX development.
>
> -- Jonathan
>
> On 8/04/2014 11:29 a.m., Kevin Rushforth wrote:
>> Just to make sure we are running the same program, the one I ran to 
>> verify that RT-33954 is fixed was the simple test program in the 
>> comments of that bug. Here it is (with the imports omitted for brevity).
>>
>> public class Example extends Application {
>>    public static void main(String[] args) {
>>        //this is called from a static block in 
>> javafx.scene.control.Control
>>        PlatformImpl.setDefaultPlatformUserAgentStylesheet();
>>
>>        Application.launch(args);
>>    }
>>
>>    @Override
>>    public void start(final Stage primaryStage) throws Exception {
>>    }
>> }
>>
>> The above program runs fine for me with no exception.
>>
>> Jonathan: are you seeing something different? Or perhaps running a 
>> different example?
>>
>> NOTE: if you run this from IntelliJ it will not work. I verified that 
>> with Debbie last week (on a different issue), which may be why you 
>> are seeing a problem. Running it from command line, from NB, or from 
>> Eclipse works.
>>
>> -- Kevin
>>
>>
>> Jonathan Giles wrote:
>>> Firstly, I agree - this does seem to still be reproducible despite 
>>> Kevin's comment that it should have been resolved in JavaFX 8.0 due 
>>> to RT-28754 <https://javafx-jira.kenai.com/browse/RT-28754>, so that 
>>> is troubling. I'll leave Kevin to comment on that.
>>>
>>> Secondly, RT-33954 was closed as a duplicate of RT-28754 
>>> <https://javafx-jira.kenai.com/browse/RT-28754>, so it would be 
>>> better to leave RT-33954 closed and move discussion (including what 
>>> you recently posted) into RT-28754 
>>> <https://javafx-jira.kenai.com/browse/RT-28754>. The discussion can 
>>> start in there and most probably a new bug will need to be opened 
>>> (as RT-28754 <https://javafx-jira.kenai.com/browse/RT-28754> did 
>>> result in a code change that at one point appears to have fixed the 
>>> problem, so we're possibly dealing with a regression).
>>>
>>> Thirdly, whether this is a suitable bug for someone learning the 
>>> ropes is debatable. I'll leave Kevin to offer his thoughts, but 
>>> perhaps you can propose a patch that resolves this issue for you in 
>>> your test scenarios. Also, a good starting point is to develop a 
>>> simple test application that helps to demonstrate this issue 
>>> (preferably the test case is a single class with no dependencies), 
>>> and which you can then share in the jira issue via copy/paste into a 
>>> comment.
>>>
>>> Fourthly, to be a contributor in the OpenJDK requires you to follow 
>>> a process to get the paperwork in order. It is wise to get that 
>>> started as soon as possible, as it can sometimes take a while. 
>>> Here's a link to the process: http://openjdk.java.net/contribute/ 
>>> The main thing is the OCA.
>>>
>>> Finally, welcome! :-)
>>>
>>> -- Jonathan
>>>
>>> On 6/04/2014 1:06 p.m., Sandipan Razzaque wrote:
>>>> Hi JavaFX devs!
>>>>
>>>> I was wondering how people felt about re-opening this bug? I don't 
>>>> believe
>>>> it has been fixed (see my comment).
>>>>
>>>> I'm also happy to work on it. But, let me know if you think my time 
>>>> would
>>>> be better spent elsewhere. I'm keen to take on a small bug to just 
>>>> get the
>>>> hang of the process and community (I'll be stumbling with mercurial 
>>>> along
>>>> the way too!). I think this bug is an ideal candidate for someone just
>>>> learning the ropes.
>>>>
>>>> https://javafx-jira.kenai.com/browse/RT-33954
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> SR
>>>>
>>>> Sandipan Razzaque | www.sandipan.net
>>>
>