On Tue, 11 Aug 2026 20:32:03 GMT, Alexander Zuev <[email protected]> wrote:

>> modules/javafx.graphics/src/main/java/javafx/scene/AccessibleAttribute.java 
>> line 814:
>> 
>>> 812:      * </ul>
>>> 813:      */
>>> 814:     VISIBLE_ITEM_RANGE(int[].class),
>> 
>> 1. this is a new attribute, so this PR needs as CSR, correct?
>> 2. would it make more sense to use a more descriptive record instead of 
>> int[]?  
>> 
>> minor: the values in this enum are not sorted alphabetically - should they?  
>> do we care?
>
>> 1. this is a new attribute, so this PR needs as CSR, correct?
> 
> I have no idea. If that would be a change in the public API i would 
> definitely say yes, for the attribute - since we add it and not changing the 
> meaning of the existing attribute - may be? Gray area for me honestly. 
> @kevinrushforth Any comments?
> 
>> 2. would it make more sense to use a more descriptive record instead of 
>> int[]?
> 
> That would require more processing on the native side so i would just leave 
> it as is. It is a technical attribute that is required to pass information 
> from the skin level to the native a11y helper - it is not supposed to be 
> available for any other purposes.
> 
>> minor: the values in this enum are not sorted alphabetically - should they? 
>> do we care?
> 
> Not really. Changing the existing code just to sort the enum - i would hate 
> to do so, i prefer to keep the history cleaner, it's an old code, technical 
> binding of the parameters to the native bound variables, nobody really looks 
> at it except the compiler.

AccessibleAttribute is public API.  The new attribute also needs `@since 28`.
CSR is needed.

(it's fine to keep it an `int[]`)

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/2217#discussion_r3761525540

Reply via email to