On Mon, 24 Mar 2025 20:03:47 GMT, Joe Darcy <da...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Doug Lea 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 47 additional commits >> since the last revision: >> >> - Merge branch 'openjdk:master' into JDK-8319447 >> - Match indent of naster changes >> - Use TC_MASK in accord with https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8330017 >> (Unnecessarily for now.) >> - Reword javadoc >> - Use SharedSecrets for ThreadLocalRandomProbe; other tweaks >> - Disambiguate caller-runs vs Interruptible >> - Merge branch 'openjdk:master' into JDK-8319447 >> - Associate probes with carriers if Virtual (no doc updates yet) >> - Reduce volatile reads >> - Address review comments; reactivation tweak >> - ... and 37 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/6ea3e040...b552c225 > > src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/concurrent/ForkJoinPool.java line 3507: > >> 3505: >> 3506: /** >> 3507: * Submits a one-shot task that becomes enabled after the given > > If the javadoc for the new methods from the ScheduledExecutorService > interface are cut-and-pasted from that interface, then I recommend using the > directed inherit doc feature which would reduce the javadoc text in this > class to something like: > > > /** > * {@inheritdoc ScheduledExecutorService } > * @param command {@inheritdoc ScheduledExecutorService } > * ... > * @throws NullPointerException {@inheritdoc ScheduledExecutorService } > */ The schedule(Runnable ..) and schedule(Callable ..) methods are a single sentence in the interface. The ForkJoinPool methods has more to say about cancellation and shutdown. So while it could inherit, doesn't seem to be worth it here. The descriptions in scheduleAtFixedRate and scheduleWithFixedDelay aren't identity to the interface because there are additional exceptional completions to list. So I don't think these can inherit. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/23702#discussion_r2011950769
