On Sat, 25 Mar 2023 10:47:20 GMT, Lance Andersen <lan...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> I recently added a `@throws` by review comment from Lance. I tend to agree >> that is not very useful, so I'm removing both ocurrences as per your >> recommendation. >> >> If Lance wants it back, he can add a review comment saying so. I don't >> particularly care which professor gets the last word in this matter :-) > > Please add them back before pushing with `@throws IOException if an error > occurs` > > Yes I understand they do not add much value but it will reduce noise from > IDEs and if/when we add more checks for missing javadoc tags, it will save us > from having to revisit this Thanks, I've added `@throws IOException if an error occurs` to all methods throwing `IOException`. For the record, let me state my personal (rather strong) opinion: I think this a pretty crazy level of boilerplate noise for a test and that it affects readability negatively. My IDE (IntelliJ) does not complain about this at all. Any IDE which complains should be fixed or configured to not complain. Changing Javadoc to complain about this in a scope like this would be a poor decision. I think the PR is ready to be sponsored after this. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/12231#discussion_r1148352043
