On Tue, 11 Jul 2023 17:54:23 GMT, Roger Riggs <rri...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> In java.time packages, clarify timeline order javadoc to mention "before" >> and "after" in the value of the `compareTo` method return values. >> Add javadoc @see tags to isBefore and isAfter methods >> >> Replace use of "negative" and positive with "less than zero" and "greater >> than zero" in javadoc @return >> The term "positive" is ambiguous, zero is considered positive and indicates >> equality. > > Roger Riggs has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a > merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes > brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains 12 additional > commits since the last revision: > > - Improve wording and remove markup for clarity > - Merge branch 'master' into 8310033-time-compareto > - Correct the descriptions to correctly identify the compareTo return > value < 0 as this is before that, and > 0 as this is after that. > Thanks to a careful reviewer spotting my reversing of the conditions. > - Improve the grammar of "the comparator value is" -> "the comparator value, > that is" > Thanks for the reminder. > - Merge branch 'master' into 8310033-time-compareto > - Improve descriptions to be more specific and remove inappropriate use of > before/after > Remove extra blank lines > - Clarify return values of date time classes > - Use {@code xxx} to highlight the comparison against the arg. > Update copyrights. > - Merge branch 'master' into 8310033-time-compareto > - Clarify for Duration, AbstractChronology, and Chronology > - ... and 2 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/cbbf7dea...1d39e2d4 Please re-review; its doc-only so can be still included in JDK 21. ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/14479#issuecomment-1644428298