On Thu, 3 Jul 2025 06:46:25 GMT, Prasanta Sadhukhan <psadhuk...@openjdk.org> 
wrote:

> > Both image and description are two independent fields of ImageIcon object, 
> > each has its own getter and setter, and each can be changed independently. 
> > We should not enforce the order of calls: if an app developer wants to set 
> > the image to null, temporarily or not, the value of the description has to 
> > be preserved
> 
> I guess resetting the description came from the fact that description is 
> mentioned as "Sets the description of the image. This is meant to be a brief 
> textual description of the object." so if image is null, the description of 
> the image logically should be nothing.

I agree that a description for a `null` image doesn't make sense.

Then, it also depends on how it's really handled. If the image in the 
`ImageIcon` object is `null`, the description could be ignored.

> But again, as pointed out, description has its own setter and getter so user 
> would expect whatever description is stored either by 
> [ImageIcon](https://docs.oracle.com/en/java/javase/24/docs/api/java.desktop/javax/swing/ImageIcon.html#%3Cinit%3E(java.awt.Image,java.lang.String))([Image](https://docs.oracle.com/en/java/javase/24/docs/api/java.desktop/java/awt/Image.html)
>  image, 
> [String](https://docs.oracle.com/en/java/javase/24/docs/api/java.base/java/lang/String.html)
>  description) constructor or `setDescription `would be returned same via 
> `getDescription`.. If not, the spec for set and getDescription needs to be 
> modified to to incorporate null-image scenario.

Exactly.

Updating the specification for `setDescription` and `getDescription` to 
indicate the description will be set to `null` if the image is set to `null` 
will make the API cumbersome and less clear.

I prefer leaving the description intact.

> But all-in-all I guess this description change can go in separate PR along 
> with [above 
> change](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/25767#discussion_r2164102520)

Have anyone submit a bug to address this deficiency? If not, I'll submit one.

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/25767#issuecomment-3031604978

Reply via email to