RFR: 8328746: Remove unused imports in demo apps

[Andy Goryachev]

On Thu, 21 Mar 2024 22:23:44 GMT, Kevin Rushforth <kcr at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Using Eclipse IDE to remove unused imports in **demo apps** (3D, Ensemble, etc.) and update the copyright year to 2024. Using wildcard for more than 10 static imports.
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> 
>> This is a trivial change (though fairly large), 1 reviewer is probably enough.
>
> apps/samples/Ensemble8/src/app/java/ensemble/samplepage/Description.java line 35:
> 
>> 33: 
>> 34: import static ensemble.samplepage.SamplePage.INDENT;
>> 35: import static ensemble.samplepage.SamplePageContent.title;
> 
> I see that the static imports (for ensemble.xxx) were moved up to the top. Is that deliberate?

it's how the formatter is currently configured.
do we have a preferred order?

> apps/samples/Ensemble8/src/app/java/ensemble/samplepage/Description.java line 55:
> 
>> 53: import ensemble.SampleInfo;
>> 54: import ensemble.SampleInfo.URL;
>> 55: import ensemble.generated.Samples;
> 
> I see that `ensemble.xxx` is moved after `javafx.xxx`; similarly, elsewhere I see `com.sun.xxx` imports moved after. What's the algorithm your IDE uses to sort imports? sort stuff that starts with "java" first and then everything else alphabetically?

this is how the IDE formatter is currently configured - it should not matter, especially since it dos not use wildcards (except for static imports).

> apps/samples/Ensemble8/src/samples/java/ensemble/samples/graphics2d/puzzle/Piece.java line 48:
> 
>> 46: /**
>> 47:  * Node that represents a puzzle piece
>> 48:  */
> 
> Hmm. This is more than just fixing imports. Were these lines reformatted because they were touching the modified import lines? Anything other than changes to the import statements will require extra time / mental energy to review.

this is just one spot that bothered me.  reformatted since I have to delete a blank line.

won't happen again, I promise.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/1420#discussion_r1534768134
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/1420#discussion_r1534769787
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/1420#discussion_r1534771453