Hi Piet,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thank you Jim,
Yes, I think you are right that the term rectangular in the documentation needs
clarification. Just because I wanted to know what rectangular means in this
context, I added the rotated tests.
I submitted Bug 6650197 yesterday to track this issue.
And yes, the cause of one area being rectangular and the other not,
> while both being equal, will have to do with the trivial check that
> is made. The implementer apparently did not read the last sentence of
> the class description, that says:
" The analysis that the Area class must perform on the path may not
> reflect the same concepts of "simple and obvious" as a human being
> perceives. "
I'm not sure who you are referring to as "the implementer" there. The
"last sentence" that you quote was written by "the implementer" of the
Area class to inform the developer of a caveat related to its
processing. In some sense, that sentence "relaxes" the API guarantees
in a non-specific way.
My question remains: am I right in stating that
a.equals(b) && b.equals(a) && a.isRectangular != b.isRectangular()
never should be true?
It may be true sometimes, but don't count on it.
In that case I will file a bug report.
See the above bug 6650197 which may cover the issues already...
...jim
===========================================================================
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
of the message "signoff JAVA2D-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
