On Tue, 7 Jan 2025 04:43:58 GMT, Joe Darcy <da...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/reflect/ClassFileFormatVersion.java >> line 58: >> >>> 56: * 2: ACC_STRICT modifier >>> 57: * 3: no changes >>> 58: * 4: no changes >> >> The version mapping can be tricky here: is "1" 1.0 plus 1.1? I presume "2" >> is 1.2, "3" is 1.3.x, "4" is 1.4.x >> >> Might be useful to include the actual JVMS classfile version numbers for >> ease of reference back to JVMS. > > I assume the wording implicitly is referring to the enum position, which uses > a "RELEASE_$N" convention. However, I agree that adding the major version in > some form would aid people more familiar with those numbers. One possibility: > > > 3 (47.0) no changes > 4 (48.0) no changes > > > If that is adopted, perhaps the preview features could be listed with the > minor version set. How about versions like 1.1, ... 1.8, 9, ... which follows the since versions of libraries and should have no ambiguity? I will commit if everyone agrees. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/22934#discussion_r1905830382
