<AWT Dev> [9] Review request for 8055664: move 14 tests about setLocationRelativeTo to jdk

[Yuri Nesterenko]

Thank you Alexander!

new version:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~yan/8055664/webrev.01

-yan


On 08/28/2014 05:59 PM, Alexander Zvegintsev wrote:
> Hello Yuri,
>
> IIUC, this test may fail on Ubuntu due to JDK-8036915 [1].
Oh yes, I even put it to @bug tag.

>
> the fix looks good to me in general, but I have some minor comments:
>
> 91         testEverything = false; // NB: change this to true to test
> everything
>
> I think this line can be removed and comment should be at line 41. As
> for me,
> it is easier to find this "switch" at the beginning of the test.
Some time ago there was a discussion about too long tests,
mostly in VM I believe, and somebody suggested a systemwide switch to
choose between long and short versions.
I removed line 91.

>
> Add empty lines between functions for more readability, please.
OK.

>
> Text in placeholders looks odd for me: "Hidden is java.awt.Label". I
> think that we should
> change order to something like  "java.awt.Label is hidden."
There should be comma after is to make it less odd:-)
Changed, though!

New version:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~yan/8055664/webrev.01

-yan
>
>
> [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8036915
>
> --
> Thanks,
> Alexander.
>
> On 08/26/2014 10:42 AM, Yuri Nesterenko wrote:
>> A polite reminder!
>>
>>
>> On 08/20/2014 04:09 PM, Yuri Nesterenko wrote:
>>> Hi team,
>>>
>>> please review this test update in jdk9:
>>>
>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~yan/8055664/webrev.00
>>>
>>> ( https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8055664 )
>>>
>>> There's a single test made out of 14 old internal functional tests.
>>> Existing tests do verify that a Frame (Dialog, JFrame etc.
>>> toplevel) does setLocationRelativeTo(Component) right.
>>>
>>> As the number of components * toplevels is rather big,
>>> the test picks randomly just few of them from the lists.
>>> If by chance there will be a failure, a simple option would
>>> allow to run all combinations.
>>> Also, if we'll have a "switch" controlling this selection
>>> behavior, we'll use it here.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> -yan
>>
>