[Rev 01] RFR: 8242489: ChoiceBox: initially toggle not sync'ed to selection

[Ambarish Rapte]

On Thu, 16 Apr 2020 11:18:55 GMT, Ambarish Rapte <arapte at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> btw: just noticed that there are methods in ChoiceBoxSkin testing the fix for next/prev
>> 
>>     @Test public void test_jdk_8988261_selectNext() {
>>     @Test public void test_jdk_8988261_selectPrevious() {
>> 
>> the name look like they want to point to the corresponding issue .. but the id is incorrect: that id doesn't exist,
>> should be 8088261 (spelling error, I think) - is it okay to change them to the right id?
>
>>     1. do nothing for a (don't feel like filing yet another bug around selection ;) and b (the skin behaves correctly, I
>>     think)
> 
> I am good with this. Though I will file a JBS for the correction in ChoiceBoxSelectionModel.
> `seletPrevious()`, `selectNext()` need one more check `value instanceof SeparatorMenuItem`.
> and similarly `selectFirst()` and `selectLast()` should be overridden correctly.
> and I can't think of why `select()` was changed so may be rethink about it :).
> We can discuss it again whenever we start fixing it.
> 
> 
>>     2. fix the test to be resistant against implementation changes of selectionModel
> 
> Thanks for link to [JDK-8088261](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8088261), As mentioned in this bug
> description, "Culprit is an incorrect override of select(int): it may reject the new index if that would select a
> separator, but it must not select an arbitrary index instead",  So It is not sure to me what should `select()` do in
> such scenario. So I think the test can also go as is, in case we change the behavior then test can be changed with it.

> should be 8088261 (spelling error, I think) - is it okay to change them to the right id?

That will be good to change, but not sure if as part of this bug. It will be unrelated to fix.

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

PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jfx/pull/177