On Tue, 22 Oct 2024 23:48:34 GMT, Mandy Chung <mch...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> I believe the specification for class or interface display name is too >> tight: if we have `java.awt.List` versus `java.util.List`, our current >> implementation prints `List` for both cases. It makes sense for an >> implementation to print something like `j.a.List` versus `j.u.List`. > > Returning the fully-qualified class name could also be an option. Since the > implementation is not changed, I would suggest promoting the implSpec text to > normal spec text. For a proposal to change the specification as well as the > implementation to return something different with incompatibility, it'd be > good to do it as a separate RFE and discuss what was considered when the > implSpec was decided to print the unqualified class name. I have promoted the implementation specification to API specification, describing that we will investigate in another RFE. Please review the latest revision and the CSR. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/20665#discussion_r1811620985
