On Thu, 19 Jun 2025 09:36:19 GMT, Viktor Klang <vkl...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> This collects miscellaneous open issues that can be resolved with
>> documentation updates; each indicated by adding JDK issue numbers
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/concurrent/CompletionStage.java line
> 103:
>
>> 101: * cause. This distinguishes exceptions in an action itself from those
>> 102: * it depends on. If you want them handled in the same way, you might
>> 103: * choose to catch {@link RuntimeException}. If a stage is dependent
>
> Perhaps something like the following:
>
> Suggestion:
>
> * it depends on. If they are to be handled the same, instead catch {@link
> RuntimeException}.
> * If a stage is dependent
>
>
> 🤔
Done
> src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/concurrent/atomic/AtomicReferenceFieldUpdater.java
> line 49:
>
>> 47: /**
>> 48: * A reflection-based utility that enables atomic updates to
>> 49: * designated non-static {@code volatile} reference fields of designated
>
> Wouldn't this change also apply to the other AtomicXFieldUpdaters?
Yes. Will do. Also, as mentioned by @liach we could trap violations by throwing
a better exception. But considering that people should be using VarHandles
instead anyway these days, and old uses might depend on current behavior, it
doesn't seem worthwhile to add? (line 338)
+ if (Modifier.isStatic(modifiers))
+ throw new IllegalArgumentException("Must not be static");
-------------
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/25880#discussion_r2156718705
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/25880#discussion_r2156709501
