New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
8237505: RadioMenuItem in ToggleGroup: deselected on accelerator #1002
Conversation
👋 Welcome back kpk! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into |
Webrevs
|
This looks good, given the decision to not to allow deselection by an accelerator. But I wonder if the right approach is to have a property in the ToggleGroup which determines whether to allow all items to be deselected. If set, the radio menu items should be allowed to be deselected by both keyboard and mouse; if not set, the first item added to a group should be automatically selected, and radio menu items would not get deselected by the mouse or keyboard. I think it might qualify as a separate enhancement (and a welcome one, since it saves some boilerplate code). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Tested with the MonkeyTester app.
I'd like to have a discussion on a new ToggleGroup's property (i'll send an email to the mailing list).
@@ -175,7 +175,12 @@ private static void doAcceleratorInstall(final List<? extends MenuItem> items, f | |||
} | |||
if (!menuitem.isDisable()) { | |||
if (menuitem instanceof RadioMenuItem) { | |||
((RadioMenuItem)menuitem).setSelected(!((RadioMenuItem)menuitem).isSelected()); | |||
if(((RadioMenuItem)menuitem).getToggleGroup() == null){ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
minor: this group insists on adding spaces after "if" and before "{"
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
You can use a pattern variable here to get rid of all the casts.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Updated the code to address above comments
I saw the mail chain sent out for this discussion. I agree that if any changes required as a result of this discussion can be taken as separate enhancement as you mentioned in the previous comment. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
lgtm
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The fix looks good to me!
@karthikpandelu This change now passes all automated pre-integration checks. ℹ️ This project also has non-automated pre-integration requirements. Please see the file CONTRIBUTING.md for details. After integration, the commit message for the final commit will be:
You can use pull request commands such as /summary, /contributor and /issue to adjust it as needed. At the time when this comment was updated there had been 18 new commits pushed to the
As there are no conflicts, your changes will automatically be rebased on top of these commits when integrating. If you prefer to avoid this automatic rebasing, please check the documentation for the /integrate command for further details. As you do not have Committer status in this project an existing Committer must agree to sponsor your change. Possible candidates are the reviewers of this PR (@andy-goryachev-oracle, @aghaisas) but any other Committer may sponsor as well. ➡️ To flag this PR as ready for integration with the above commit message, type |
/integrate |
@karthikpandelu |
@aghaisas please sponsor the PR. |
/sponsor |
Going to push as commit e234c89.
Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts. |
@aghaisas @karthikpandelu Pushed as commit e234c89. 💡 You may see a message that your pull request was closed with unmerged commits. This can be safely ignored. |
No check was present in
RadioMenuItem
accelerator to see if it is in aToggleGroup
or not.Made changes to check if
RadioMenuItem
is part ofToggleGroup
or not. If it is part of aToggleGroup
, then it can not be cleared using accelerator.Added test to validate the change.
Progress
Issue
Reviewers
Reviewing
Using
git
Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jfx pull/1002/head:pull/1002
$ git checkout pull/1002
Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/1002
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jfx pull/1002/head
Using Skara CLI tools
Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 1002
View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 1002
Using diff file
Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/1002.diff