On Sat, 30 Oct 2021 09:46:13 GMT, Jeanette Winzenburg <[email protected]>
wrote:
>> I don't see an easy way to do that, and I'm not in favor of making private
>> implementation details package-public just to test some internal state. Of
>> course, mnemonic support should have been designed in a way that is more
>> easily testable, but this PR is not the place to do that.
>
> in the skin test, it could be tested indirectly, though not in isolation:
>
> - access the actual mnenomic via accessibleAttribute
> - test whether labelFor/action is working as expected when firing an
> alt-mnemonic onto the scene
>
> Just noticed that there is no test of TextBinding .. that's where the correct
> working of the basics should be tested, shouldn't it?
How about adding a JUnit test for TextBinding instead? The class is
sufficiently complicated to warrant one, and it has quite a few branches to
cover. I think testing it through a `Control` is a bit too high level.
Something like:
TextBinding tb = new TextBinding("complicated_mnemonic__example_(s)__");
assertEquals("m", tb.getMnemonic());
assertEquals(KeyCombination.M, tb.getMnemonicKeyCombination());
assertEquals(12, tb.getMnemonicIndex());
-------------
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jfx/pull/647
