-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.6k
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
[Workaround in comments] ESC removes information from entry editor #10764
Comments
Does this also occur in the 5.13 were we downgraded javafx (is integreatd in latest main) again? |
Hi, happy to try, but cannot find https://builds.jabref.org/pull/10747/merge anymore, I think. |
you can use latest main we merged it into main |
Thanks, on JabRef 5.13--2024-01-09--01c3e15 it is still the case |
I haven't found the reason behind this behavior or a way to fix it but found a workaround. Workaround: click on the entry again to remove the focus from the entry editor and press |
I can confirm the same behavior under macOS. To me it seems like some javafx thingy default behavior. No idea though |
Just stumbled into this with a more recent version (I use vim a lot and I have the pressing Esc is kind of automatic) Sadly I don't know javafx enough to easily look into it |
Hi, I can try to tackle that issue if you wish ! I was able to reproduce this behavior. |
@jeanprbt I think this more a javafx standard behavior. |
Maybe we can close this issue then. :) |
Then, I'd tag it as depending on external...
But maybe checking, communicating this upstream and reporting here where the issue is placed would be good.
Sorry, am not of much help these weeks.
--
Sent from my LineageOS device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
…On 9 April 2024 20:43:37 CEST, Jean Perbet ***@***.***> wrote:
> @jeanprbt I think this more a javafx standard behavior.
Maybe we can close this issue then. :)
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#10764 (comment)
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Message ID: ***@***.***>
|
I would suggest to leave it open, as a kind of "documentation", as "undo" is an important feature, but since issue might depend on external and there is also a workaround I would set the priority to low. |
We need a minimal working example to report to the JavaFX community. Maybe fork https://github.com/Siedlerchr/javafxreproducer and just add a text field @jeanprbt . Maybe with a label above the text field with the steps a user should make to reproduce the behavior and what is the accepted behavior. I know, this is kind of trivial intended behavior. However, the JavaFX implementors are in their JavaFX world and we need to get close to their world to explain. |
Hi, I can do that but what should I do next ? Should I file an issue on official Open JFX issue tracker with a link to my fork ? |
You can only submit a bug report via https://bugreport.java.com/bugreport/ if you can reproduce it |
I tried to reproduce the bug using a minimalistic example, you can see here. However, using the original |
@jeanprbt Thank you for building the reproducer and reporting that is a JabRef issue. Now, I could narrow it down. Will submit a fix soon. This comment is only to prevent anyone else to work on this now. Focus on other things.
Let's look at org.jabref.gui.fieldeditors.FieldEditors? I tested it. It occurres in all kinds of editors. ESC just clears the field. No special code. Then, let's investiage KeyBinding.java. ESC appears twice. One unused. One used. Used in ALL txt fields (See TextInputKeyBindings). Introduced at #8829. |
JabRef version
5.12 (latest release)
Operating system
GNU / Linux
Details on version and operating system
No response
Checked with the latest development build (copy version output from About dialog)
Steps to reproduce the behaviour
I am on JabRef 5.12--2023-12-24--4233bad
Linux 6.6.10-200.fc39.x86_64 amd64
Java 21.0.1
JavaFX 21.0.1+6
ESC
.CTRL+Z
That is sad because the user, at least I, might accidentally press
ESC
.I consider this a bug because I think this is not intended. But am happy to revise thi as a feature request if you think so.
Appendix
No response
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: