On Thu, 4 Apr 2024 11:30:14 GMT, Tejesh R <t...@openjdk.org> wrote:

> > > > Can you please explain why you need to handle MultiResolutionImage for 
> > > > this printing issue for NimbusL&F and why was it not needed for other 
> > > > L&F Also, you need to add this bugid to the test
> > > 
> > > 
> > > The fix is for L&F other than Nimbus. It is working in Nimbus since Image 
> > > drawing is handled by SunGraphics2D class in 
> > > [drawHIDPIImage()](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/b9da14012da5f1f72d4f6e690c18a43e87523173/src/java.desktop/share/classes/sun/java2d/SunGraphics2D.java#L3126)
> > >  method. Whereas other L&F, pathGraphics handles ImageDrawing where 
> > > MultiResolutionImage is not yet handled. The fix which I proposed for 
> > > [8210807](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/38bbbe7588c94d3a0edd1c120ba49cbd0851a720)
> > >  bug fixed for Non-Nimbus L&F but caused regression for Nimbus. Hence 
> > > after further analysis and study the root cause was found out to be 
> > > Non-handling of MultiResolutionImage in 
> > > [getBufferedImage()](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/b9da14012da5f1f72d4f6e690c18a43e87523173/src/java.desktop/share/classes/sun/print/PathGraphics.java#L1122).
> > 
> > 
> > I guess the PathGraphics path should be used for printing images and should 
> > be common for all so why Nimbus is going via SunGraphics2D? [and it seems 
> > you updated the summary to include Aqua so Aqua is also going via 
> > SunGraphics2D?]
> 
> Yes, the issue is found in Aqua also and that too uses SunGraphics2D. And 
> regarding why SunGraphics2D is used for Nimbus and Aqua, its because in 
> Nimbus PeekGraphics is used which in-turn useses SunGraphics2D and in other 
> its PW/WPathGraphics. I'm not sure why this is different.

Can you point to the code where it uses PeekGraphics in Nimbus/Aqua and the 
subsequent code from where is starts to bifurcate in other L&F meaning where it 
starts to uses PeekGraphics for Nimbus/Aqua and PathGraphics for others?

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/18187#issuecomment-2036938917

Reply via email to