On Sat, 18 Oct 2025 05:05:48 GMT, Phil Race <[email protected]> wrote:
> This is a follow-on to 8365077: java.awt.font.NumericShaper violates > equals/hashCode contract > > The factory method to construct a contextual shaper from a bitmask will > happily store illegal, unspecified bits. > So there are still ways to create instances which violate the contract. > > This isn't possible with the enum approach. We should align these two. And we > should document it. > > Additionally the behaviour of eliminating an value which is of lesser > precedence is also something we should specify. > > CSR : https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8370161 Marked as reviewed by kizune (Reviewer). ------------- PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/27884#pullrequestreview-3400577406
