Skip to content

Route macOS editor navigation through sequenced input commands - #6027

Merged
shai-almog merged 9 commits into
masterfrom
mac-editor-navigation
Oct 16, 2026
Merged

shai-almog merged 9 commits into
masterfrom
mac-editor-navigation

Conversation

@shai-almog

@shai-almog shai-almog commented Oct 16, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

AppKit word/page navigation was swallowed for TextInputClient editors, and line commands used newline boundaries instead of the editor's visual layout. Reversed selections also collapsed when copied into AppKit, so subsequent native movement or typing could target the wrong range.

Route word movement/deletion and visual line/paragraph/document boundaries through the sequenced editor-command dispatcher. Keep TextInputState.getSelectionStart/End() ordered for existing Android, JavaScript and other consumers; new anchor/focus accessors carry direction through the Apple bridge. Preserve that direction when switching between semantic word movement and native character movement.

Distinguish page movement from AppKit scroll-page commands: scrolling changes only the viewport, while caret paging uses cumulative line heights and rendered columns. Spatial word-left/right commands are separate from logical backward/forward commands and follow rendered bidi runs, including styled text. Bounded fallback geometry snapshots center on the active selection focus. Word movement/deletion classifies Unicode letters, marks, decimal digits and underscore, including supplementary code points, using reproducible Unicode 16 tables compatible with CLDC. Combining marks inherit their base character's classification so variation selectors are not detached from emoji. Deletion at document boundaries leaves undo/redo and edit notifications unchanged. The developer guide documents these contracts. Legacy TextArea command dispatch retains its existing path.

Validation of the review fixes:

  • Java 8 Maven verify: 7,824 tests pass with zero failures/errors/skips. After the final styled-text/line-edge refinement, the focused verify rerun passes 26 editor input/state/geometry tests, including styled RTL text and punctuation-only lines; PMD, Checkstyle and SpotBugs report zero findings.
  • The exact CI documentation gates pass locally: no since markers and no classic Javadoc comments in documented source trees. Author-tag validation also passes.
  • Changed Mac Objective-C syntax compilation passes against the native application's generated headers. This is compilation evidence, not a new native application interaction run.
  • Guide Vale passes with zero findings; both Unicode tables regenerate deterministically.
  • Regressions cover ordered and directional selection, focus-centered geometry, Unicode/emoji deletion, spatial versus logical RTL movement, variable-height paging, viewport-only scrolling and no-op deletion preserving redo.

Earlier revision validation: a local Maven/ParparVM ARM64 macOS application build passed 12 native keyboard checks, followed by 12 paragraph-selection/typing-undo/paste checks and 20 comparison/Mailings checks. Those native interaction runs predate these review fixes and are not claimed as runtime certification of the current head.

The Unicode classifier is not dictionary segmentation or UAX #29 word/grapheme segmentation. These checks do not certify every input method or bidi behavior. No native CI job was dispatched or added.

@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Cloudflare Preview

@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Oct 16, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Developer Guide build artifacts are available for download from this workflow run:

Developer Guide quality checks:

  • AsciiDoc linter: No issues found (report)
  • Vale: No alerts found (report)
  • Paragraph capitalization: No paragraph capitalization issues (report)
  • LanguageTool: No grammar matches (report)
  • Image references: No unused images detected (report)

@shai-almog

shai-almog commented Oct 16, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Compared 206 screenshots: 206 matched.
✅ JavaScript-port screenshot tests passed.

@shai-almog

shai-almog commented Oct 16, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Compared 170 screenshots: 170 matched.

Native Android coverage

  • 📊 Line coverage: 16.01% (26002/162390 lines covered) [HTML preview] (artifact android-coverage-report, jacocoAndroidReport/html/index.html)
    • Other counters: instruction 14.37% (122147/850229), branch 9.91% (8466/85441), complexity 7.81% (6525/83503), method 11.59% (4648/40094), class 19.78% (960/4853)
    • Lowest covered classes
      • kotlin.collections.kotlin.collections.ArraysKt___ArraysKt – 0.00% (0/6367 lines covered)
      • kotlin.collections.unsigned.kotlin.collections.unsigned.UArraysKt___UArraysKt – 0.00% (0/2384 lines covered)
      • org.jacoco.agent.rt.internal_0e20598.asm.org.jacoco.agent.rt.internal_0e20598.asm.ClassReader – 0.00% (0/1524 lines covered)
      • org.jacoco.agent.rt.internal_0e20598.asm.org.jacoco.agent.rt.internal_0e20598.asm.MethodWriter – 0.00% (0/922 lines covered)
      • kotlin.sequences.kotlin.sequences.SequencesKt___SequencesKt – 0.00% (0/736 lines covered)
      • com.google.common.cache.com.google.common.cache.LocalCache$Segment – 0.00% (0/726 lines covered)
      • okio.okio.Buffer – 0.00% (0/687 lines covered)
      • kotlin.text.kotlin.text.StringsKt___StringsKt – 0.00% (0/625 lines covered)
      • com.codename1.androidcompat.rt.com.codename1.androidcompat.rt.TextXmlPullParser – 0.00% (0/623 lines covered)
      • com.codename1.androidcompat.androidx.constraintlayout.core.widgets.com.codename1.androidcompat.androidx.constraintlayout.core.widgets.Flow – 0.00% (0/576 lines covered)

✅ Native Android screenshot tests passed.

Native Android coverage

  • 📊 Line coverage: 16.01% (26002/162390 lines covered) [HTML preview] (artifact android-coverage-report, jacocoAndroidReport/html/index.html)
    • Other counters: instruction 14.37% (122147/850229), branch 9.91% (8466/85441), complexity 7.81% (6525/83503), method 11.59% (4648/40094), class 19.78% (960/4853)
    • Lowest covered classes
      • kotlin.collections.kotlin.collections.ArraysKt___ArraysKt – 0.00% (0/6367 lines covered)
      • kotlin.collections.unsigned.kotlin.collections.unsigned.UArraysKt___UArraysKt – 0.00% (0/2384 lines covered)
      • org.jacoco.agent.rt.internal_0e20598.asm.org.jacoco.agent.rt.internal_0e20598.asm.ClassReader – 0.00% (0/1524 lines covered)
      • org.jacoco.agent.rt.internal_0e20598.asm.org.jacoco.agent.rt.internal_0e20598.asm.MethodWriter – 0.00% (0/922 lines covered)
      • kotlin.sequences.kotlin.sequences.SequencesKt___SequencesKt – 0.00% (0/736 lines covered)
      • com.google.common.cache.com.google.common.cache.LocalCache$Segment – 0.00% (0/726 lines covered)
      • okio.okio.Buffer – 0.00% (0/687 lines covered)
      • kotlin.text.kotlin.text.StringsKt___StringsKt – 0.00% (0/625 lines covered)
      • com.codename1.androidcompat.rt.com.codename1.androidcompat.rt.TextXmlPullParser – 0.00% (0/623 lines covered)
      • com.codename1.androidcompat.androidx.constraintlayout.core.widgets.com.codename1.androidcompat.androidx.constraintlayout.core.widgets.Flow – 0.00% (0/576 lines covered)

Benchmark Results

Detailed Performance Metrics

Metric Duration
SIMD kernel backend scalar fallback (no native SIMD)
SIMD int-add (64K x300) java 210ms / native 200ms = 1.0x speedup
SIMD float-mul (64K x300) java 165ms / native 147ms = 1.1x speedup
SIMD kernel correctness PASS (native result == scalar reference)
Base64 payload size 8192 bytes
Base64 benchmark iterations 6000
Base64 SIMD byte path gated to scalar (CPU autovectorizes scalar; explicit SIMD not beneficial here)
Base64 CN1 encode 72.000 ms
Base64 CN1 decode 83.000 ms
Base64 native encode 418.000 ms
Base64 encode ratio (CN1/native) 0.172x (82.8% faster)
Base64 native decode 264.000 ms
Base64 decode ratio (CN1/native) 0.314x (68.6% faster)
Image encode benchmark status skipped (SIMD unsupported)

@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Oct 16, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

✅ Continuous Quality Report

Test & Coverage

Static Analysis

  • SpotBugs [Report archive]
    • ✅ ByteCodeTranslator: 0 findings (no issues)
    • ✅ android: 0 findings (no issues)
    • ✅ android-compat: 0 findings (no issues)
    • ✅ android-res-compiler: 0 findings (no issues)
    • ✅ backend: 0 findings (no issues)
    • ✅ backend-test: 0 findings (no issues)
    • ✅ build-engine: 0 findings (no issues)
    • ✅ build-hint-catalog: 0 findings (no issues)
    • ✅ build-hint-tools: 0 findings (no issues)
    • ✅ codenameone-gradle-plugin: 0 findings (no issues)
    • ✅ codenameone-maven-plugin: 0 findings (no issues)
    • ✅ core-unittests: 0 findings (no issues)
    • ✅ ios: 0 findings (no issues)
    • ✅ javac: 0 findings (no issues)
    • ✅ project-model: 0 findings (no issues)
  • ✅ PMD: 0 findings (no issues) [Report archive]
  • ✅ Checkstyle: 0 findings (no issues) [Report archive]

Generated automatically by the PR CI workflow.

@shai-almog

shai-almog commented Oct 16, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Compared 185 screenshots: 185 matched.
Native Windows port (x64 / Intel-AMD): full hellocodenameone screenshot suite rendered offscreen with Direct2D/DirectWrite, plus the real benchmarks (base64 native/CN1/SIMD, image createMask/applyMask/modifyAlpha/PNG/JPEG, SSE2 SIMD kernels). Compared against the in-repo baseline in scripts/windows/screenshots.

Benchmark Results

Detailed Performance Metrics

Metric Duration
SIMD kernel backend SSE2 (x64) / NEON (arm64) native kernels
SIMD int-add (64K x300) java 27ms / native 3ms = 9.0x speedup
SIMD float-mul (64K x300) java 28ms / native 2ms = 14.0x speedup
SIMD kernel correctness PASS (native result == scalar reference)
Base64 native bridge unavailable (CN1 + SIMD + image benchmarks only)
Base64 payload size 8192 bytes
Base64 benchmark iterations 6000
Base64 SIMD byte path gated to scalar (CPU autovectorizes scalar; explicit SIMD not beneficial here)
Base64 CN1 encode 36.000 ms
Base64 CN1 decode 43.000 ms
Base64 SIMD encode 59.000 ms
Base64 encode ratio (SIMD/CN1) 1.639x (63.9% slower)
Base64 SIMD decode 50.000 ms
Base64 decode ratio (SIMD/CN1) 1.163x (16.3% slower)
Image encode benchmark iterations 100
Image createMask (SIMD off) 3.000 ms
Image createMask (SIMD on) 2.000 ms
Image createMask ratio (SIMD on/off) 0.667x (33.3% faster)
Image applyMask (SIMD off) 10.000 ms
Image applyMask (SIMD on) 11.000 ms
Image applyMask ratio (SIMD on/off) 1.100x (10.0% slower)
Image modifyAlpha (SIMD off) 15.000 ms
Image modifyAlpha (SIMD on) 9.000 ms
Image modifyAlpha ratio (SIMD on/off) 0.600x (40.0% faster)
Image modifyAlpha removeColor (SIMD off) 16.000 ms
Image modifyAlpha removeColor (SIMD on) 11.000 ms
Image modifyAlpha removeColor ratio (SIMD on/off) 0.688x (31.3% faster)

ParparVM vs HotSpot (JDK 25): Windows x64

Runner CPU: AMD64 Family 26 Model 2 Stepping 1, AuthenticAMD (baseline windows-x64@amd64-family-26-model-2-authenticamd)

1 improvement past the baseline, which fails until rebaselined:

  • translator (self) on all 4 CPUs: time 0.57x against a 0.73x baseline (-21.7%, tolerance 20%)

Ratios are ParparVM / JDK 25: below 1.00x ParparVM is faster (time) or smaller (RAM). Median of 5 interleaved, paired rounds; every run's output was verified. A ratio more than 15% (time) / 15% (RAM) away from its baseline in vm/selfhost/perf-baseline/ fails: above it is a regression, below it an improvement that has to be rebaselined (a row whose calibration runs were noisier carries a wider tolerance), and for RAM the change must also exceed 0.05x in absolute terms. Both run unpinned on all of the runner's CPUs, with their own default thread counts.

Benchmark Cores Time RAM Status
hello (WinHelloMain) 4 1.91x (base 1.41x, +35.4%) 0.75x (base 0.75x, -0.0%) ok
translator (self) 4 0.57x (base 0.73x, -21.7%) 0.53x (base 0.47x, +13.1%) IMPROVED: rebaseline (time -21.7%)
intArithmetic 4 1.00x (base 0.99x, +0.7%) 0.05x (base 0.05x, +0.5%) ok
longArithmetic 4 0.99x (base 0.99x, +0.5%) 0.05x (base 0.05x, +0.7%) ok
mathTranscendental 4 0.95x (base 0.94x, +1.2%) 0.06x (base 0.06x, +0.0%) ok
arraySequential 4 1.75x (base 1.75x, +0.3%) 0.38x (base 0.38x, +0.2%) ok
arrayRandom 4 1.02x (base 1.00x, +1.9%) 0.23x (base 0.23x, -0.0%) ok
objectAllocation 4 1.61x (base 1.65x, -2.3%) 0.13x (base 0.21x, -38.7%) ok
valueEscape 4 0.10x (base 0.10x, -0.3%) 0.04x (base 0.04x, -1.0%) ok
hashMapChurn 4 1.68x (base 1.59x, +5.8%) 0.07x (base 0.09x, -25.7%) ok
stringBuilding 4 1.31x (base 1.39x, -5.7%) 0.18x (base 0.27x, -33.6%) ok
recursion 4 1.42x (base 1.44x, -1.7%) 0.06x (base 0.06x, +0.5%) ok
quicksort 4 1.08x (base 1.06x, +2.5%) 0.12x (base 0.12x, +0.4%) ok

A change that moves performance ON PURPOSE records the new baseline in vm/selfhost/perf-baseline/pr/6027.json, with the reason, from this job's perf-results.json. The rebaseline is then part of this pull request's diff:

python3 vm/selfhost/calibrate-perf-baseline.py --pr 6027 --reason "<why these benchmarks moved>" perf-results.json

Result: improved past the baseline: rebaseline required

@shai-almog

shai-almog commented Oct 16, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Compared 185 screenshots: 185 matched.
Native Windows port (arm64 / Apple Silicon - Arm): full hellocodenameone screenshot suite rendered offscreen with Direct2D/DirectWrite, plus the real benchmarks (base64 native/CN1/SIMD, image createMask/applyMask/modifyAlpha/PNG/JPEG, NEON SIMD kernels). Compared against the in-repo baseline in scripts/windows/screenshots.

Benchmark Results

Detailed Performance Metrics

Metric Duration
SIMD kernel backend SSE2 (x64) / NEON (arm64) native kernels
SIMD int-add (64K x300) java 49ms / native 3ms = 16.3x speedup
SIMD float-mul (64K x300) java 49ms / native 3ms = 16.3x speedup
SIMD kernel correctness PASS (native result == scalar reference)
Base64 native bridge unavailable (CN1 + SIMD + image benchmarks only)
Base64 payload size 8192 bytes
Base64 benchmark iterations 6000
Base64 SIMD byte path gated to scalar (CPU autovectorizes scalar; explicit SIMD not beneficial here)
Base64 CN1 encode 59.000 ms
Base64 CN1 decode 70.000 ms
Base64 SIMD encode 78.000 ms
Base64 encode ratio (SIMD/CN1) 1.322x (32.2% slower)
Base64 SIMD decode 73.000 ms
Base64 decode ratio (SIMD/CN1) 1.043x (4.3% slower)
Image encode benchmark iterations 100
Image createMask (SIMD off) 6.000 ms
Image createMask (SIMD on) 1.000 ms
Image createMask ratio (SIMD on/off) 0.167x (83.3% faster)
Image applyMask (SIMD off) 19.000 ms
Image applyMask (SIMD on) 20.000 ms
Image applyMask ratio (SIMD on/off) 1.053x (5.3% slower)
Image modifyAlpha (SIMD off) 18.000 ms
Image modifyAlpha (SIMD on) 14.000 ms
Image modifyAlpha ratio (SIMD on/off) 0.778x (22.2% faster)
Image modifyAlpha removeColor (SIMD off) 22.000 ms
Image modifyAlpha removeColor (SIMD on) 14.000 ms
Image modifyAlpha removeColor ratio (SIMD on/off) 0.636x (36.4% faster)

ParparVM vs HotSpot (JDK 25): Windows arm64

Runner CPU: ARMv8 (64-bit) Family 8 Model D49 Revision 0, MICROSOFT CORPORATION (baseline windows-arm64@armv8-64-bit-family-8-model-d49-microsoft-corporation)

Ratios are ParparVM / JDK 25: below 1.00x ParparVM is faster (time) or smaller (RAM). Median of 5 interleaved, paired rounds; every run's output was verified. A ratio more than 15% (time) / 15% (RAM) away from its baseline in vm/selfhost/perf-baseline/ fails: above it is a regression, below it an improvement that has to be rebaselined (a row whose calibration runs were noisier carries a wider tolerance), and for RAM the change must also exceed 0.05x in absolute terms. Both run unpinned on all of the runner's CPUs, with their own default thread counts.

Benchmark Cores Time RAM Status
hello (WinHelloMain) 4 1.11x (base 1.11x, +0.2%) 1.01x (base 0.97x, +3.6%) ok
translator (self) 4 0.83x (base 0.84x, -0.6%) 0.52x (base 0.51x, +1.1%) ok
intArithmetic 4 1.04x (base 1.04x, -0.1%) 0.06x (base 0.06x, +1.2%) ok
longArithmetic 4 0.79x (base 0.80x, -0.3%) 0.06x (base 0.06x, +1.8%) ok
mathTranscendental 4 0.71x (base 0.72x, -0.9%) 0.06x (base 0.06x, +0.2%) ok
arraySequential 4 0.36x (base 0.46x, -21.0%) 0.39x (base 0.39x, +0.1%) ok
arrayRandom 4 0.94x (base 0.94x, +0.1%) 0.23x (base 0.23x, +0.0%) ok
objectAllocation 4 1.81x (base 2.81x, -35.4%) 0.33x (base 0.43x, -23.2%) ok
valueEscape 4 0.76x (base 0.76x, +0.1%) 0.05x (base 0.05x, +2.2%) ok
hashMapChurn 4 0.99x (base 0.98x, +0.1%) 0.11x (base 0.12x, -8.6%) ok
stringBuilding 4 1.53x (base 1.43x, +7.2%) 0.27x (base 0.27x, -0.2%) ok
recursion 4 1.44x (base 1.46x, -1.6%) 0.06x (base 0.07x, -0.3%) ok
quicksort 4 1.01x (base 1.00x, +0.9%) 0.12x (base 0.12x, -0.0%) ok

Result: no regression

@shai-almog

shai-almog commented Oct 16, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Compared 185 screenshots: 185 matched.
Native Linux port (x64), GTK3/Cairo/Pango, ParparVM bytecode-to-C (no JVM): the hellocodenameone screenshot suite rendered by a native ELF built + run on the GitHub x64 runner. Baseline: scripts/linux/screenshots.

ParparVM vs HotSpot (JDK 25): Linux x64

Runner CPU: AMD EPYC 7763 64-Core Processor (baseline linux-x64@amd-epyc-7763-64-core-processor)

Ratios are ParparVM / JDK 25: below 1.00x ParparVM is faster (time) or smaller (RAM). Median of 5 interleaved, paired rounds; every run's output was verified. A ratio more than 15% (time) / 15% (RAM) away from its baseline in vm/selfhost/perf-baseline/ fails: above it is a regression, below it an improvement that has to be rebaselined (a row whose calibration runs were noisier carries a wider tolerance), and for RAM the change must also exceed 0.05x in absolute terms. Both run unpinned on all of the runner's CPUs, with their own default thread counts.

Benchmark Cores Time RAM Status
hello (LinuxHelloMain) 4 0.82x (base 0.85x, -3.1%) 0.99x (base 1.02x, -2.5%) ok
translator (self) 4 0.53x (base 0.63x, -16.0%) 0.51x (base 0.52x, -1.4%) ok
intArithmetic 4 1.10x (base 1.12x, -1.2%) 0.07x (base 0.06x, +32.7%) ok
longArithmetic 4 1.08x (base 1.08x, +0.0%) 0.06x (base 0.05x, +2.0%) ok
mathTranscendental 4 1.09x (base 1.08x, +0.4%) 0.08x (base 0.07x, +5.1%) ok
arraySequential 4 2.49x (base 2.00x, +24.3%) 0.36x (base 0.36x, -0.3%) ok
arrayRandom 4 0.92x (base 0.91x, +1.6%) 0.21x (base 0.21x, +0.3%) ok
objectAllocation 4 1.63x (base 1.65x, -0.9%) 0.34x (base 0.37x, -9.4%) ok
valueEscape 4 0.10x (base 0.10x, -0.4%) 0.04x (base 0.04x, -2.3%) ok
hashMapChurn 4 1.47x (base 1.48x, -0.8%) 0.09x (base 0.09x, -3.9%) ok
stringBuilding 4 1.29x (base 1.39x, -7.3%) 0.26x (base 0.26x, -0.0%) ok
recursion 4 1.19x (base 1.25x, -5.0%) 0.07x (base 0.08x, -2.7%) ok
quicksort 4 1.10x (base 1.07x, +2.7%) 0.12x (base 0.11x, +8.8%) ok

Result: no regression

@shai-almog

shai-almog commented Oct 16, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Compared 185 screenshots: 185 matched.
Native Linux port (arm64), GTK3/Cairo/Pango, ParparVM bytecode-to-C (no JVM): the hellocodenameone screenshot suite rendered by a native ELF built + run on the GitHub arm64 runner. Baseline: scripts/linux/screenshots-arm.

ParparVM vs HotSpot (JDK 25): Linux arm64

Runner CPU: Neoverse-N2 (baseline linux-arm64@neoverse-n2)

Ratios are ParparVM / JDK 25: below 1.00x ParparVM is faster (time) or smaller (RAM). Median of 5 interleaved, paired rounds; every run's output was verified. A ratio more than 15% (time) / 15% (RAM) away from its baseline in vm/selfhost/perf-baseline/ fails: above it is a regression, below it an improvement that has to be rebaselined (a row whose calibration runs were noisier carries a wider tolerance), and for RAM the change must also exceed 0.05x in absolute terms. Both run unpinned on all of the runner's CPUs, with their own default thread counts.

Benchmark Cores Time RAM Status
hello (LinuxHelloMain) 4 1.01x (base 1.02x, -0.6%) 0.94x (base 0.87x, +7.9%) ok
translator (self) 4 0.72x (base 0.70x, +3.6%) 0.47x (base 0.45x, +6.2%) ok
intArithmetic 4 1.04x (base 1.04x, -0.0%) 0.03x (base 0.03x, -0.7%) ok
longArithmetic 4 0.79x (base 0.79x, -0.1%) 0.03x (base 0.03x, -2.3%) ok
mathTranscendental 4 1.10x (base 1.10x, -0.0%) 0.03x (base 0.03x, +2.2%) ok
arraySequential 4 0.34x (base 0.36x, -5.4%) 0.37x (base 0.37x, +0.2%) ok
arrayRandom 4 0.93x (base 0.94x, -0.2%) 0.20x (base 0.20x, -0.1%) ok
objectAllocation 4 1.80x (base 1.77x, +2.0%) 0.37x (base 0.38x, -2.2%) ok
valueEscape 4 0.51x (base 0.51x, -0.1%) 0.03x (base 0.03x, +0.2%) ok
hashMapChurn 4 0.84x (base 0.84x, -0.2%) 0.12x (base 0.12x, -1.2%) ok
stringBuilding 4 1.35x (base 1.36x, -0.4%) 0.26x (base 0.26x, -0.3%) ok
recursion 4 1.41x (base 1.43x, -1.4%) 0.03x (base 0.04x, -3.1%) ok
quicksort 4 1.00x (base 0.99x, +0.9%) 0.09x (base 0.09x, +1.1%) ok

Result: no regression

@shai-almog

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

@codex review

@chatgpt-codex-connector

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Oct 16, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review Status Commit Review trigger
📝 Code Review ✅ Completed 2026-10-16T08:36:22.436586Z f13d73f Manual request
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 73d5950071

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread CodenameOne/src/com/codename1/ui/editor/EditorView.java
Comment thread Ports/MacPort/nativeSources/METALView.m Outdated
Comment thread CodenameOne/src/com/codename1/ui/editor/EditorView.java Outdated
Comment thread CodenameOne/src/com/codename1/ui/editor/EditorView.java Outdated
@shai-almog

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

@codex review

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 21633616ef

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread CodenameOne/src/com/codename1/ui/TextInputState.java
Comment thread CodenameOne/src/com/codename1/ui/editor/WordCharacters.java
Comment thread Ports/MacPort/nativeSources/METALView.m Outdated
Comment thread Ports/MacPort/nativeSources/METALView.m
@shai-almog

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

@codex review

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 7de4cc47d1

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread Ports/MacPort/nativeSources/METALView.m Outdated
Comment thread Ports/MacPort/nativeSources/METALView.m Outdated
Comment thread Ports/MacPort/nativeSources/CN1AppKitTextInput.m
@shai-almog

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

@codex review

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 58f3948e4a

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread CodenameOne/src/com/codename1/ui/TextInputGeometry.java
@shai-almog

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

@codex review

@chatgpt-codex-connector

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Swish!

Reviewed commit: f13d73f573

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

@shai-almog

shai-almog commented Oct 16, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Compared 185 screenshots: 185 matched.
Native Windows port, REAL shipping pipeline: the hellocodenameone screenshot suite rendered by a binary CROSS-COMPILED on Linux (clang-cl + xwin, WebView2 linked) and RUN on a Windows x64 runner. Compared against the in-repo baseline in scripts/windows/screenshots.

Benchmark Results

Detailed Performance Metrics

Metric Duration
SIMD kernel backend SSE2 (x64) / NEON (arm64) native kernels
SIMD int-add (64K x300) java 68ms / native 5ms = 13.6x speedup
SIMD float-mul (64K x300) java 66ms / native 5ms = 13.2x speedup
SIMD kernel correctness PASS (native result == scalar reference)
Base64 native bridge unavailable (CN1 + SIMD + image benchmarks only)
Base64 payload size 8192 bytes
Base64 benchmark iterations 6000
Base64 SIMD byte path gated to scalar (CPU autovectorizes scalar; explicit SIMD not beneficial here)
Base64 CN1 encode 73.000 ms
Base64 CN1 decode 90.000 ms
Base64 SIMD encode 120.000 ms
Base64 encode ratio (SIMD/CN1) 1.644x (64.4% slower)
Base64 SIMD decode 101.000 ms
Base64 decode ratio (SIMD/CN1) 1.122x (12.2% slower)
Image encode benchmark iterations 100
Image createMask (SIMD off) 9.000 ms
Image createMask (SIMD on) 3.000 ms
Image createMask ratio (SIMD on/off) 0.333x (66.7% faster)
Image applyMask (SIMD off) 20.000 ms
Image applyMask (SIMD on) 25.000 ms
Image applyMask ratio (SIMD on/off) 1.250x (25.0% slower)
Image modifyAlpha (SIMD off) 28.000 ms
Image modifyAlpha (SIMD on) 21.000 ms
Image modifyAlpha ratio (SIMD on/off) 0.750x (25.0% faster)
Image modifyAlpha removeColor (SIMD off) 32.000 ms
Image modifyAlpha removeColor (SIMD on) 41.000 ms
Image modifyAlpha removeColor ratio (SIMD on/off) 1.281x (28.1% slower)

@shai-almog
shai-almog merged commit 5ec482b into master Oct 16, 2026
53 of 58 checks passed
@shai-almog
shai-almog deleted the mac-editor-navigation branch October 16, 2026 12:55
shai-almog added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 17, 2026
…baselines

Both rows were rebaselined from the value master's overlays had already moved, which
the resolver refuses as two changes that did not see each other. They now start from
the merged result and keep its time and tolerances; only memory is ours.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
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.

1 participant