RFR: 8293119: Alternative CONSTRAINED_RESIZE_POLICY
Marius Hanl
mhanl at openjdk.org
Wed Oct 12 15:33:56 UTC 2022
On Wed, 14 Sep 2022 15:26:03 GMT, Andy Goryachev <angorya at openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Good question.
>>
>> We could deprecate the old policy, although leaving it as is also leaves all its issues in place (see JDK-8292810). There is a subtle behavioral difference between the old CONSTRAINED_RESIZE_POLICY and CONSTRAINED_RESIZE_POLICY_SUBSEQUENT_COLUMNS that people might notice and may not like. The difference is that the old policy works similar to CONSTRAINED_RESIZE_POLICY_LAST_COLUMN until the last column cannot be resized, then it resizes one before it.
>>
>> Another option is that we could add another policy which will work exactly (minus bugs) as the old one. What do you think?
>
> Try tests/manual/controls/ATableViewResizeTester.java to see the behavior.
> We could deprecate the old policy, although leaving it as is also leaves all its issues in place (see JDK-8292810). There is a subtle behavioral difference between the old CONSTRAINED_RESIZE_POLICY and CONSTRAINED_RESIZE_POLICY_SUBSEQUENT_COLUMNS that people might notice and may not like. The difference is that the old policy works similar to CONSTRAINED_RESIZE_POLICY_LAST_COLUMN until the last column cannot be resized, then it resizes one before it.
>
> Another option is that we could add another policy which will work exactly (minus bugs) as the old one. What do you think?
I like that all new constrained resize policies have a more describing name and I think we should stick to it, therefore I'm in favor of deprecating the 'old', more generic named resize policy.
Regarding the behaviour change, we may want to implement a constrained resize policy which does the same as the old one, but without bugs and a name similar to the other ones.
-------------
PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/897
More information about the openjfx-dev
mailing list