8373038: Interpolator factories should follow method naming convention #1996

mstr2 · 2025-12-03T17:08:24Z

The following interpolator factories don't follow the standard method naming convention:

Interpolator.SPLINE(double, double, double, double)
Interpolator.TANGENT(Duration, double, Duration, double)
Interpolator.TANGENT(Duration, double)
Interpolator.STEPS(int, StepPosition)

New methods named ofSpline, ofTangent, and ofSteps are added. The existing methods are deprecated (not for removal) in favor of the correctly-named methods. This change is in line with the new ofLinear method added with #1977.

Progress

Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
Commit message must refer to an issue
Change requires a CSR request matching fixVersion jfx26 to be approved (needs to be created)
Change must be properly reviewed (2 reviews required, with at least 1 Reviewer, 1 Author)

Issue

JDK-8373038: Interpolator factories should follow method naming convention (Enhancement - P4)

Reviewers

Andy Goryachev (@andy-goryachev-oracle - Reviewer) 🔄 Re-review required (review applies to 1fb91b9a)

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jfx.git pull/1996/head:pull/1996
$ git checkout pull/1996

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/1996
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jfx.git pull/1996/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 1996

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 1996

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/1996.diff

Using Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

mstr2 · 2025-12-03T17:08:36Z

/reviewers 2
/csr

bridgekeeper · 2025-12-03T17:09:39Z

👋 Welcome back mstrauss! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into master will be added to the body of your pull request. There are additional pull request commands available for use with this pull request.

openjdk · 2025-12-03T17:17:38Z

❗ This change is not yet ready to be integrated.
See the Progress checklist in the description for automated requirements.

openjdk · 2025-12-03T17:19:42Z

@mstr2
The total number of required reviews for this PR (including the jcheck configuration and the last /reviewers command) is now set to 2 (with at least 1 Reviewer, 1 Author).

openjdk · 2025-12-03T17:20:22Z

@mstr2 has indicated that a compatibility and specification (CSR) request is needed for this pull request.

@mstr2 please create a CSR request for issue JDK-8373038 with the correct fix version. This pull request cannot be integrated until the CSR request is approved.

mlbridge · 2025-12-03T17:23:48Z

Webrevs

01: Full - Incremental (2128f2a9)
00: Full (1fb91b9a)

andy-goryachev-oracle · 2025-12-03T20:21:38Z

This change makes sense from purely esthetic reasons, though it probably won't be noticed by the app developers as they mostly deal with the interpolators via CSS (and there is no change there, as far as I can tell).

andy-goryachev-oracle

lgtm

andy-goryachev-oracle · 2025-12-04T00:06:51Z

modules/javafx.graphics/src/main/java/javafx/animation/Interpolator.java


    /**
-     * Creates an {@code Interpolator}, which {@link #curve(double) curve()} is
+     * Use {@link #ofSpline(double, double, double, double)}.


maybe something like "This poorly named method is deprecated in favor of ..." or words to that extent?

or keep the original description?

maybe something like "This poorly named method is deprecated in favor of ..." or words to that extent?

We wouldn't do this in the description, but possibly in the @deprecated tag text (not sure).

or keep the original description?

That's what we typically do, although I can see the value in what @mstr2 proposed. I'll take a look at the built docs and see how it looks.

I've commited the suggested change without noticing your reply here. The description is now similar to:

* This is a legacy method named inconsistently with method naming conventions, * use {@link #ofSpline(double, double, double, double)} instead.

I can revert the change, or keep the existing description.

I'll take a closer look soon.

andy-goryachev-oracle · 2025-12-04T00:10:48Z

modules/javafx.controls/src/main/java/javafx/scene/control/skin/PaginationSkin.java

    private static final double SWIPE_THRESHOLD = 0.30;
    private static final double TOUCH_THRESHOLD = 15;
-    private static final Interpolator interpolator = Interpolator.SPLINE(0.4829, 0.5709, 0.6803, 0.9928);
+    private static final Interpolator interpolator = Interpolator.ofSpline(0.4829, 0.5709, 0.6803, 0.9928);


Off-topic: shouldn't this interpolator be specified by the stylesheet (i.e. to be able to modify the transition if needed)?

More of a question for @kevinrushforth

You mean should it be styleable in pagination? Probably, but I haven't heard anyone request it. It could be an RFE for "some day".

kevinrushforth

This looks like a reasonable thing to do. I'll take a closer look at the docs before approving.

kevinrushforth · 2025-12-04T21:29:21Z

modules/javafx.controls/src/main/java/javafx/scene/control/skin/PaginationSkin.java

    private static final double SWIPE_THRESHOLD = 0.30;
    private static final double TOUCH_THRESHOLD = 15;
-    private static final Interpolator interpolator = Interpolator.SPLINE(0.4829, 0.5709, 0.6803, 0.9928);
+    private static final Interpolator interpolator = Interpolator.ofSpline(0.4829, 0.5709, 0.6803, 0.9928);


You mean should it be styleable in pagination? Probably, but I haven't heard anyone request it. It could be an RFE for "some day".

kevinrushforth · 2025-12-04T21:40:39Z

modules/javafx.graphics/src/main/java/javafx/animation/Interpolator.java


    /**
-     * Creates an {@code Interpolator}, which {@link #curve(double) curve()} is
+     * Use {@link #ofSpline(double, double, double, double)}.


maybe something like "This poorly named method is deprecated in favor of ..." or words to that extent?

We wouldn't do this in the description, but possibly in the @deprecated tag text (not sure).

or keep the original description?

That's what we typically do, although I can see the value in what @mstr2 proposed. I'll take a look at the built docs and see how it looks.

Interpolator factories should follow method naming convention

1fb91b9

openjdk bot added the rfr Ready for review label Dec 3, 2025

openjdk bot added the csr Need approved CSR to integrate pull request label Dec 3, 2025

andy-goryachev-oracle approved these changes Dec 4, 2025

View reviewed changes

Merge branch 'master' into fixes/interpolator-names

838965d

kevinrushforth reviewed Dec 4, 2025

View reviewed changes

doc changes

2128f2a

8373038: Interpolator factories should follow method naming convention #1996

Are you sure you want to change the base?

8373038: Interpolator factories should follow method naming convention #1996

Uh oh!

Conversation

mstr2 commented Dec 3, 2025 • edited by openjdk bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Progress

Issue

Reviewers

Reviewing

Uh oh!

mstr2 commented Dec 3, 2025

Uh oh!

bridgekeeper bot commented Dec 3, 2025

Uh oh!

openjdk bot commented Dec 3, 2025

Uh oh!

openjdk bot commented Dec 3, 2025

Uh oh!

openjdk bot commented Dec 3, 2025

Uh oh!

mlbridge bot commented Dec 3, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Webrevs

Uh oh!

andy-goryachev-oracle commented Dec 3, 2025

Uh oh!

andy-goryachev-oracle left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

kevinrushforth left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

mstr2 commented Dec 3, 2025 •

edited by openjdk bot

Loading

mlbridge bot commented Dec 3, 2025 •

edited

Loading