Skip to content

Conversation

@ShahzaibIbrahim
Copy link
Contributor

Diverting responsibility for thinking about whether a transparentPixel needs to be specified or not to the consumer. Otherwise we risk that someone unexperienced just calls this constructor without thinking about the transparent pixel, but would actually need to take into account that it must be set.

This PR resolves: #2615 (comment)

Diverting responsibility for thinking about whether a transparentPixel
needs to be specified or not to the consumer. Otherwise we risk that
someone unexperienced just calls this constructor without thinking about
the transparent pixel, but would actually need to take into account that
it must be set.
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

Test Results

  115 files  ±0    115 suites  ±0   10m 50s ⏱️ -54s
4 562 tests ±0  4 546 ✅ ±0  16 💤 ±0  0 ❌ ±0 
  311 runs  ±0    308 ✅ ±0   3 💤 ±0  0 ❌ ±0 

Results for commit 8e703d6. ± Comparison against base commit ba112f0.

Copy link
Contributor

@akoch-yatta akoch-yatta left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

As written in the PR the and doesn't change any logic but adapts the code as mentioned.

@akoch-yatta akoch-yatta merged commit 4a6ab2a into eclipse-platform:master Oct 24, 2025
17 checks passed
@akoch-yatta akoch-yatta deleted the master-442-revise branch October 24, 2025 09:02
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants