On Tue, 16 Sep 2025 17:10:18 GMT, Pavel Rappo <pra...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Please review this documentation-only change, which I believe does **NOT**
>> require CSR.
>>
>> The change touches java.time.** classes that I happen to have been using a
>> lot recently. While the diff is pretty self-describing, here's the summary
>> of what I did:
>>
>> * used a comma separator for some big integer values, to improve readability;
>> * fixed a few typos and grammar.
>>
>> While I'm open to discuss the change, I also have some questions. Note: I'm
>> not attempting to address those questions in this PR.
>>
>> * What's the significance of the second argument in
>> Duration.between(Temporal, Temporal) being exclusive? For example, would the
>> result of the following call be different if the second argument was
>> inclusive?
>>
>> Duration.between(Instant.ofEpochSecond(1), Instant.ofEpochSecond(2))
>>
>> Are there any cases here where that distinction matters?
>>
>> * In many cases, the following phrase is used throughout documentation:
>>
>> > positive or negative
>>
>> While the intent is clearly to stress the directed nature of values,
>> shouldn't we -- for completeness -- also mention zero where applicable?
>>
>> * What's the significance of title-case for Java Time-Scale? FWIW, the
>> documentation also uses "Java time-scale".
>
> Pavel Rappo has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> An empty commit to kick GHA
@jodastephen, could you comment on any of the questions in the PR summary?
Also, I don't use Period often, but I find this method perplexing. How is it
supposed to be used?
/**
* Checks if any of the three units of this period are negative.
* <p>
* This checks whether the years, months or days units are less than zero.
*
* @return true if any unit of this period is negative
*/
public boolean isNegative()
-------------
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/27296#issuecomment-3302620443
