On Tue, 7 Jul 2026 08:05:06 GMT, Matthias Baesken <[email protected]> wrote:

>> The IS_WINVISTA macro is obsolete these days, because we run on higher 
>> Windows versions as a minimum requirement.
>> Same is true for the isVistaOS() method.
>> 
>> ---------
>> - [x] I confirm that I make this contribution in accordance with the 
>> [OpenJDK Interim AI Policy](https://openjdk.org/legal/ai).
>
> Matthias Baesken has updated the pull request incrementally with one 
> additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Remove unneeded comment

Changes requested by aivanov (Reviewer).

The copyright year in `awt_TextArea.cpp` and `awt_TextField.cpp` could also be 
bumped up.

src/java.desktop/windows/classes/sun/awt/Win32GraphicsEnvironment.java line 1:

> 1: /*

Bump the copyright year? You did it in previous PRs.

src/java.desktop/windows/classes/sun/awt/windows/WComponentPeer.java line 1088:

> 1086:             return false;
> 1087:         }
> 1088:         return true;

My preference is to preserve the blank line between, however, it's not 
important in this case.

src/java.desktop/windows/native/libawt/java2d/windows/WindowsFlags.cpp line 1:

> 1: /*

Bump the copyright year?

src/java.desktop/windows/native/libawt/windows/awt_Win32GraphicsEnv.cpp line 93:

> 91: 
> 92: /**
> 93:  * Returns true if dwm composition is enabled, false if dwm composition 
> is disabled.

Suggestion:

 * Returns true if DWM composition is enabled, false if DWM composition is 
disabled.

You're updating the comment, I'd use capital letters for DWM (Desktop Window 
Manager).

src/java.desktop/windows/native/libawt/windows/awt_Win32GraphicsEnv.cpp line 99:

> 97:         return (BOOL)dwmIsCompositionEnabled;
> 98:     }
> 99:     BOOL bRes = FALSE;

I'd leave the blank line above `BOOL bRes = FALSE` — it separates the quick 
return path from getting the state.

FWIW, I may remove the blank line between this line and the next `try` block, 
as they're closely related.

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

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/31762#pullrequestreview-4670583753
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/31762#issuecomment-4934511587
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/31762#discussion_r3558198776
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/31762#discussion_r3558171799
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/31762#discussion_r3558200652
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/31762#discussion_r3558257424
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/31762#discussion_r3558279701

Reply via email to