On Tue, 6 Jun 2023 09:46:53 GMT, Karthik P K <[email protected]> wrote:
>> tests/system/src/test/java/test/robot/javafx/scene/TextFlowSurrogatePairInsertionIndexTest.java
>> line 151:
>>
>>> 149: private void addMultipleEmojis() {
>>> 150: Util.runAndWait(() -> {
>>> 151: text = new Text("ππππ¦ππ₯");
>>
>> Both new code (the last commit) and the old code (previous commit) fail this
>> test if the text string is the following sequence:
>> βπΏβπΏβπΏ
>> \u261d\ud83c\udfff\u261d\ud83c\udfff\u261d\ud83c\udfff
>>
>> I've tried it with jdk19 and jdk20.0.1 (the latter contains a BreakInterator
>> change [JDK-8291660](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8291660) that
>> alters its handling of grapheme clusters.
>>
>> Exception:
>>
>> java.lang.AssertionError: expected:<0> but was:<1>
>> at org.junit.Assert.fail(Assert.java:89)
>> at org.junit.Assert.failNotEquals(Assert.java:835)
>> at org.junit.Assert.assertEquals(Assert.java:647)
>> at org.junit.Assert.assertEquals(Assert.java:633)
>> at
>> test.robot.javafx.scene.TextFlowSurrogatePairInsertionIndexTest.testTextFlowInsertionIndexUsingMultipleEmojis(TextFlowSurrogatePairInsertionIndexTest.java:216)
>> at
>> java.base/jdk.internal.reflect.DirectMethodHandleAccessor.invoke(DirectMethodHandleAccessor.java:104)
>> at java.base/java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:578)
>> at
>> org.junit.runners.model.FrameworkMethod$1.runReflectiveCall(FrameworkMethod.java:59)
>> at
>> org.junit.internal.runners.model.ReflectiveCallable.run(ReflectiveCallable.java:12)
>> at
>> org.junit.runners.model.FrameworkMethod.invokeExplosively(FrameworkMethod.java:56)
>> at
>> org.junit.internal.runners.statements.InvokeMethod.evaluate(InvokeMethod.java:17)
>> at
>> org.junit.internal.runners.statements.RunBefores.evaluate(RunBefores.java:26)
>> at
>> org.junit.internal.runners.statements.RunAfters.evaluate(RunAfters.java:27)
>> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$3.evaluate(ParentRunner.java:306)
>> at
>> org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner$1.evaluate(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:100)
>> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runLeaf(ParentRunner.java:366)
>> at
>> org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:103)
>> at
>> org.junit.runners.BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.runChild(BlockJUnit4ClassRunner.java:63)
>> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$4.run(ParentRunner.java:331)
>> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner$1.schedule(ParentRunner.java:79)
>> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.runChildren(ParentRunner.java:329)
>> at org.junit.runners.ParentRunner.access$100(ParentRunner.java:66)
>> at org.junit.runners.Pare...
>
> This case is same as the one which we saw with red heart as the emoji
> sequence mentioned here is also a U+FE0F Variation Selector-16 character.
> Since it exhibits different behavior in different platforms we decided to
> remove it.
>
> I compared the insertion index calculated for these emojis with the insertion
> index calculated for red heart emoji. The insertion index calculated looks to
> be correct for the above given emojis. It is considered as 2 characters if
> color is also present else it is considered as single character.
> For me it is giving correct caret position as well in the Monkey tester.
>
> I found strange behavior when I tried to add heart emojis (with and without
> color) along with the `CLUSTERS` variable present in Monkey Tester so that it
> gets displayed when Rich Text option is selected.
> When `CLUSTERS = "β€οΈβ€β€οΈ"`, emojis are displayed properly.
> <img width="658" alt="image"
> src="https://github.com/openjdk/jfx/assets/26969459/f3de5d1d-ad8c-42a6-8284-01916dfd37a8";>
>
> When `CLUSTERS = "βπΏβπΏβπΏπ€¦πΌββοΈβ€οΈβ€β€οΈ";`, following sequence is displayed.
> <img width="532" alt="image"
> src="https://github.com/openjdk/jfx/assets/26969459/6eaa67b8-6fa1-475f-82bd-e9c48240b1c1";>
>
> This looks like a separate issue. Please let me know your thoughts on this.
@karthikpandelu :
1. you are right, multiple symbols and a failed test are due to lack of proper
handling of grapheme clusters in fx. I don't think we have a ticket, so
created JDK-8309565 for that
2. your latest fix uncovered a problem in my RichTextArea code, so thank you!
The new code passes all my tests in the MonkeyTester and RichTextArea.
-------------
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/1091#discussion_r1220270289
