On Thu, 22 May 2025 00:05:29 GMT, Kevin Rushforth <k...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Andy Goryachev has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a >> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 55 commits: >> >> - review comments >> - Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/master' into ag.text.layout.api >> - review comments >> - Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/master' into ag.text.layout.api >> - sealed >> - indent >> - Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/master' into ag.text.layout.api >> - Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/master' into ag.text.layout.api >> - Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/master' into ag.text.layout.api >> - twice >> - ... and 45 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/compare/d5f569cf...0ac75dae > > modules/javafx.graphics/src/main/java/javafx/scene/text/Text.java line 1123: > >> 1121: * @since 25 >> 1122: */ >> 1123: public final PathElement[] getStrikeThroughShape(int start, int >> end) { > > I just noticed that this is named `getStrikeThroughShape` rather than > `strikeThroughShape`. The latter would match the similar `rangeShape`, > `caretShape`, and `underlineShape` methods. We had discussed that you might > propose to fix [JDK-8341438](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8341438) by > deprecating `rangeShape` and `underlineShape` and adding new `getRangeShape` > and `getUnderlineShape` methods (although that might be problematic given the > `caretShape` property, which necessarily already has a no-arg > `getCaretShape()` method). > > Did you name this method `getStrikeThroughShape` with the intention that it > would have the fixed semantics of applying the insets from its inception? If > so, then I recommend documenting that fact in this method. Yes, you are right - and I plan to address this in https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8341438 (as it will be a separate change). ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/1596#discussion_r2102747411
