On Wed, 13 Sep 2023 12:39:00 GMT, Pavel Rappo <pra...@openjdk.org> wrote:

> This modernizes an example to use the extended for-statement introduced in 
> JDK 1.5.
> 
> I understand that StringTokenizer is a legacy class. But legacy or not, a 
> class shouldn't promote older constructs when newer fit better. Especially 
> when advising on preferred alternatives to itself.
> 
> That said, I wouldn't go as far as to use `var` anywhere in that example: JDK 
> 10, which introduced `var`, might still be relatively new to some. Nor would 
> I inline the call to `String.split` in the for-statement to dispense with the 
> `String[] result` variable: I reckon it's good for a reader unfamiliar with 
> `String.split` to see the type it returns.
> 
> Perhaps one additional thing to ponder is this: we could either add `@see` to 
> point to `String.split` or make the whole example a `@snippet`, which 
> `@link`s code to the definition of `String.split`.

No need to create another PR for such changes IMO.
Although it may be a bit odd to re-use the same variable names for different 
types, I might keep the original `myDate`/`myNumber` that aligns with other 
locations in the class descriptions.

-------------

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/15716#issuecomment-1721538491

Reply via email to