On Tue, 18 Feb 2025 23:06:42 GMT, Ian Myers wrote:
>> make/common/Modules.gmk line 95:
>>
>>> 93: SPEC_SUBDIRS += share/specs
>>> 94:
>>> 95: MAN_SUBDIRS += share/man windows/man
>>
>> Hm, normally I'd say you should use `$(TARGET_OS)/man`, but we typically
>> generate docs for all platforms
On Fri, 24 Jan 2025 10:58:24 GMT, Hannes Wallnöfer wrote:
>> Please review a doc-only change to mostly add missing `@serial` javadoc
>> tags. This is a sub-task of [JDK-8286931] to allow us to re-enable the
>> javadoc `-serialwarn` option in the JDK doc build, which has been disabled
>> since
On Thu, 30 Jan 2025 10:42:43 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This pull request contains a backport of commit
> [22069ff4](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/22069ff42b7e5c3058415ef9b6e0b50b9d2c16ef)
> from the [openjdk/jdk](https://git.openjdk.org/jdk) repository.
On Thu, 30 Jan 2025 10:42:43 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This pull request contains a backport of commit
> [22069ff4](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/22069ff42b7e5c3058415ef9b6e0b50b9d2c16ef)
> from the [openjdk/jdk](https://git.openjdk.org/jdk) repository.
Hi all,
This pull request contains a backport of commit
[22069ff4](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/22069ff42b7e5c3058415ef9b6e0b50b9d2c16ef)
from the [openjdk/jdk](https://git.openjdk.org/jdk) repository.
The commit being backported was authored by Nizar Benalla on 30 Jan 2025 and
was
On Wed, 29 Jan 2025 16:03:38 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Two groups of broken links appeared in the latest JDK docs, broken links to
> man pages and broken ietf links.
>
> - The windows tools markdown files were not being converted to HTML because
> they were placed under `wind
On Wed, 29 Jan 2025 16:03:38 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Two groups of broken links appeared in the latest JDK docs, broken links to
> man pages and broken ietf links.
>
> - The windows tools markdown files were not being converted to HTML because
> they were placed under `wind
Two groups of broken links appeared in the latest JDK docs, broken links to man
pages and broken ietf links.
- The windows tools markdown files were not being converted to HTML because
they were placed under `windows/man` rather than `share/man`, I've updated
`Modules.gmk` to pick up their loca
On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 18:55:10 GMT, Joe Wang wrote:
> Fix broken links in java.xml:
>
> Catalog: contacted Oasis. The standard page
> (https://www.oasis-open.org/standard/xmlcatalogs/) now links to the PDF
> version. That is what I'm using now, replacing the html pages. Not ideal, but
> at leas
On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 10:21:34 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This pull request contains a backport of commit
> [054c644e](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/054c644ea6ea38e54abc81e231977106d04bb69e)
> from the [openjdk/jdk](https://git.openjdk.org/jdk) repository.
Hi all,
This pull request contains a backport of commit
[054c644e](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/054c644ea6ea38e54abc81e231977106d04bb69e)
from the [openjdk/jdk](https://git.openjdk.org/jdk) repository.
The commit being backported was authored by Nizar Benalla on 20 Dec 2024 and
was
On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 10:21:17 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This pull request contains a backport of commit
> [2a68f741](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/2a68f741884e73c9ed8e5222e57f5ecb088b3cf7)
> from the [openjdk/jdk](https://git.openjdk.org/jdk) repository.
On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 10:21:17 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This pull request contains a backport of commit
> [2a68f741](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/2a68f741884e73c9ed8e5222e57f5ecb088b3cf7)
> from the [openjdk/jdk](https://git.openjdk.org/jdk) repository.
Hi all,
This pull request contains a backport of commit
[2a68f741](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/2a68f741884e73c9ed8e5222e57f5ecb088b3cf7)
from the [openjdk/jdk](https://git.openjdk.org/jdk) repository.
The commit being backported was authored by Nizar Benalla on 20 Dec 2024 and
was
On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 16:48:33 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Please review this doc-only patch to fix an issue that causes the
> cmp-baseline build to fail.
>
> The snippet in `LabelTrget.java` showed a highly rare non deterministism in
> javadoc snippet generation, which will be f
On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 16:48:27 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Please review this doc-only patch to avoid some unwanted failures in our HTML
> checks.
>
> Javadoc wraps everything under `@param` in a ``, so having an `h2` tag
> there trips some of our tests that use html validators
On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 17:26:50 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
>> Please review this doc-only patch to avoid some unwanted failures in our
>> HTML checks.
>>
>> Javadoc wraps everything under `@param` in a ``, so having an `h2` tag
>> there trips some of our tests that
On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 16:48:33 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Please review this doc-only patch to fix an issue that causes the
> cmp-baseline build to fail.
>
> The snippet in `LabelTrget.java` showed a highly rare non deterministism in
> javadoc snippet generation, which will be f
On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 17:26:50 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
>> Please review this doc-only patch to avoid some unwanted failures in our
>> HTML checks.
>>
>> Javadoc wraps everything under `@param` in a ``, so having an `h2` tag
>> there trips some of our tests that
shouldn't have an `` inside of a span.
>
> This patch moves the text about "Value-based classes and identity operations"
> above the `@param` tag, it will now be rendered at the bottom of the class
> documentation.
>
> This will need to be backported to JDK 24.
&g
Please review this doc-only patch to avoid some unwanted failures in our HTML
checks.
Javadoc wraps everything under `@param` in a ``, so having an `h2` tag
there trips some of our tests that use html validators (html-tidy and some
other tests). I believe you shouldn't have an `` inside of a s
Please review this doc-only patch to fix an issue that causes the cmp-baseline
build to fail.
The snippet in `LabelTrget.java` showed a highly rare non deterministism in
javadoc snippet generation, which will be fixed in
[JDK-8346659](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8346659), but we can fix
On Fri, 8 Nov 2024 15:19:34 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Can I please get a review for this PR that add tests to verify the value of
> `@since` tags to the Tools area modules. The test is described in this
> [email](https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/jdk-dev/2024-October/009474.html)
On Fri, 29 Nov 2024 18:53:52 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
>> Can I please get a review for this PR that add tests to verify the value of
>> `@since` tags to the Tools area modules. The test is described in this
>> [email](https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/jdk-dev/2024-O
ing. (JFR used to be a
> commercial feature and this requires special handling to be added for it in
> the test)
>
> TIA
Nizar Benalla has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the last revision:
Revert "add a missing \@
On Fri, 29 Nov 2024 12:20:02 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
>> Can I please get a review for this PR that add tests to verify the value of
>> `@since` tags to the Tools area modules. The test is described in this
>> [email](https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/jdk-dev/2024-O
ing. (JFR used to be a
> commercial feature and this requires special handling to be added for it in
> the test)
>
> TIA
Nizar Benalla has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the last revision:
add a missing \@since tag to Record
On Fri, 15 Nov 2024 11:53:00 GMT, Adam Sotona wrote:
>> Class-File API is leaving preview.
>> This is a removal of all `@PreviewFeature` annotations from Class-File API.
>> It also bumps all `@since` tags and removes
>> `jdk.internal.javac.PreviewFeature.Feature.CLASSFILE_API`.
>>
>> Please rev
On Fri, 29 Nov 2024 11:08:57 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
>> test/jdk/tools/sincechecker/modules/jdk.jlink/JdkJlinkCheckSince.java line
>> 29:
>>
>>> 27: * @summary Test for `@since` in jdk.jlink module
>>> 28: * @library /test/lib /test/jdk/tools/sincecheck
ing. (JFR used to be a
> commercial feature and this requires special handling to be added for it in
> the test)
>
> TIA
Nizar Benalla 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
On Fri, 29 Nov 2024 11:00:15 GMT, Christian Stein wrote:
>> Nizar Benalla has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Add backticks, as they are necessary. Otherwise the `@since` is treated as
>>
On Thu, 28 Nov 2024 11:33:43 GMT, Jonathan Lampérth wrote:
> This PR includes a suggested change in behaviour of `javap -l` without `-v`
> or `-c`.
> Previously it was possible to print `LineNumberTable` and
> `LocalVariableTable` without disassembled code output. This didn't make much
> sense
On Mon, 18 Nov 2024 17:06:03 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Can I get a review for this test only change to the Since Checker?
>
> I drop the distinction between classes and interfaces when generating ids and
> use a generic name "class" to describe both, as to not consid
On Mon, 18 Nov 2024 17:06:03 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Can I get a review for this test only change to the Since Checker?
>
> I drop the distinction between classes and interfaces when generating ids and
> use a generic name "class" to describe both, as to not consid
Can I get a review for this test only change to the Since Checker?
I drop the distinction between classes and interfaces when generating ids and
use a generic name "class" to describe both, as to not consider classes that
get converted to interfaces (and vice versa) as new API (Something that ma
ing. (JFR used to be a
> commercial feature and this requires special handling to be added for it in
> the test)
>
> TIA
Nizar Benalla has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the last revision:
Add backticks, as they are necessary. Otherwise
Can I please get a review for this PR that add tests to verify the value of
`@since` tags to the Tools area modules. The test is described in this
[email](https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/jdk-dev/2024-October/009474.html).
The benefit from this is helping API authors and reviewer validate the
On Wed, 16 Oct 2024 16:23:41 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Can I get a review for this patch that adds `@since` checker tests to the
> following modules: java.compiler, jdk.compiler, jdk.javadoc and jdk.jdeps.
> The initial test for `java.base` has been integrated in
> [JDK-83
On Fri, 1 Nov 2024 17:19:00 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Can I get a review for this patch that brings the last changes to fix broken
> anchors in the source code.
>
> The links updated in this patch can be grouped into 3 sections, they were
> minor so I grouped them into one P
On Fri, 1 Nov 2024 17:19:00 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Can I get a review for this patch that brings the last changes to fix broken
> anchors in the source code.
>
> The links updated in this patch can be grouped into 3 sections, they were
> minor so I grouped them into one P
ttps://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/jdk-dev/2024-June/009160.html)]
> [[2](https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/jdk-dev/2024-October/009474.html)] in
> `jdk-dev` describing how the tests work and how to run them.
>
> TIA
Nizar Benalla has updated the pull request incrementally with on
ttps://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/jdk-dev/2024-June/009160.html)]
> [[2](https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/jdk-dev/2024-October/009474.html)] in
> `jdk-dev` describing how the tests work and how to run them.
>
> TIA
Nizar Benalla has updated the pull request incrementally with one
ttps://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/jdk-dev/2024-June/009160.html)]
> [[2](https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/jdk-dev/2024-October/009474.html)] in
> `jdk-dev` describing how the tests work and how to run them.
>
> TIA
Nizar Benalla has updated the pull request incrementally with one ad
Can I get a review for this patch that brings the last changes to fix broken
anchors in the source code.
The links updated in this patch can be grouped into 3 sections, they were minor
so I grouped them into one PR.
1- Move some references from the old `foreign/package-summary.html#restricted`
ttps://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/jdk-dev/2024-June/009160.html)]
> [[2](https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/jdk-dev/2024-October/009474.html)] in
> `jdk-dev` describing how the tests work and how to run them.
>
> TIA
Nizar Benalla has updated the pull request incrementally with one
On Fri, 1 Nov 2024 15:51:10 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
>> Can I get a review for this patch that adds `@since` checker tests to the
>> following modules: java.compiler, jdk.compiler, jdk.javadoc and jdk.jdeps.
>> The initial test for `java.base` has been integrated in
>
ttps://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/jdk-dev/2024-June/009160.html)]
> [[2](https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/jdk-dev/2024-October/009474.html)] in
> `jdk-dev` describing how the tests work and how to run them.
>
> TIA
Nizar Benalla has updated the pull request with a new target bas
On Fri, 1 Nov 2024 15:36:59 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
>> test/jdk/tools/sincechecker/jdk_compiler/CheckSince_jdkCompiler.java line 27:
>>
>>> 25: * @test
>>> 26: * @bug 8341399
>>> 27: * @summary Test for `@since` for java.base module
>>
>>
On Fri, 1 Nov 2024 15:28:13 GMT, Chen Liang wrote:
>> Can I get a review for this patch that adds `@since` checker tests to the
>> following modules: java.compiler, jdk.compiler, jdk.javadoc and jdk.jdeps.
>> The initial test for `java.base` has been integrated in
>> [JDK-8331051](https://bugs
Can I get a review for this patch that adds `@since` checker tests to the
following modules: java.compiler, jdk.compiler, jdk.javadoc and jdk.jdeps. The
initial test for `java.base` has been integrated in
[JDK-8331051](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8331051).
The jtreg comments are almost
On Wed, 24 Apr 2024 14:10:29 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> This checker checks the values of the `@since` tag found in the documentation
> comment for an element against the release in which the element first
> appeared.
>
> Real since value of an API element is computed as the
On Wed, 2 Oct 2024 14:03:59 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
>> This checker checks the values of the `@since` tag found in the
>> documentation comment for an element against the release in which the
>> element first appeared.
>>
>> Real since value of an API ele
On Wed, 2 Oct 2024 14:03:59 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
>> This checker checks the values of the `@since` tag found in the
>> documentation comment for an element against the release in which the
>> element first appeared.
>>
>> Real since value of an API ele
> historical data built into `javac` which only goes back that far
>
> The intial comment at the beginning of `SinceChecker.java` holds more
> information into the program.
>
> I already have filed issues and fixed some wrong tags like in #18640, #18032,
> #18030, #18055, #18373,
On Thu, 26 Sep 2024 08:16:50 GMT, Adam Sotona wrote:
>> Class-File API is leaving preview.
>> This is a removal of all `@PreviewFeature` annotations from Class-File API.
>> It also bumps all `@since` tags and removes
>> `jdk.internal.javac.PreviewFeature.Feature.CLASSFILE_API`.
>>
>> Please rev
> historical data built into `javac` which only goes back that far
>
> The intial comment at the beginning of `SinceChecker.java` holds more
> information into the program.
>
> I already have filed issues and fixed some wrong tags like in #18640, #18032,
> #18030, #18055, #18373,
On Thu, 19 Sep 2024 16:38:54 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
>> This checker checks the values of the `@since` tag found in the
>> documentation comment for an element against the release in which the
>> element first appeared.
>>
>> Real since value of an API ele
> historical data built into `javac` which only goes back that far
>
> The intial comment at the beginning of `SinceChecker.java` holds more
> information into the program.
>
> I already have filed issues and fixed some wrong tags like in #18640, #18032,
> #18030, #18055, #18373,
On Fri, 13 Sep 2024 14:48:44 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Could I get a review for this small change?
> The page linked in `SplittableRandom` was moved at some point, this change
> points to the correct page to avoid redirects.
>
> TIA
This pull request has now been integra
On Fri, 13 Sep 2024 14:48:44 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Could I get a review for this small change?
> The page linked in `SplittableRandom` was moved at some point, this change
> points to the correct page to avoid redirects.
>
> TIA
I think this counts as "trivia
Could I get a review for this small change?
The page linked in `SplittableRandom` was moved at some point, this change
points to the correct page to avoid redirects.
TIA
-
Commit messages:
- Broken link to the dieharder distribution website in SplittableRandom
Changes: https://git
On Mon, 12 Aug 2024 17:23:15 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> The test is inspired from [FFM API's
> TestNulls](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/master/test/jdk/java/foreign/TestNulls.java),
> I customized their Null checking framework it to work with ClassFile API.
>
> T
On Tue, 10 Sep 2024 16:45:23 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
>> This checker checks the values of the `@since` tag found in the
>> documentation comment for an element against the release in which the
>> element first appeared.
>>
>> Real since value of an API ele
> historical data built into `javac` which only goes back that far
>
> The intial comment at the beginning of `SinceChecker.java` holds more
> information into the program.
>
> I already have filed issues and fixed some wrong tags like in #18640, #18032,
> #18030, #18055, #18373, #18
> historical data built into `javac` which only goes back that far
>
> The intial comment at the beginning of `SinceChecker.java` holds more
> information into the program.
>
> I already have filed issues and fixed some wrong tags like in #18640, #18032,
> #18030, #18055, #18373,
On Fri, 6 Sep 2024 09:14:18 GMT, Adam Sotona wrote:
>> Nizar Benalla has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> convert TestNullHostile to use JUnit Jupiter API
>
> src/java.base/sha
ist of methods
>
>
> //the implementation of this method in CatchBuilderImpl handles nulls, is
> this fine?
> "java.lang.classfile.CodeBuilder$CatchBuilder/catching(java.lang.constant.ClassDesc,java.util.function.Consumer)/0/0",
>
> // making this method null-h
ist of methods
>
>
> //the implementation of this method in CatchBuilderImpl handles nulls, is
> this fine?
> "java.lang.classfile.CodeBuilder$CatchBuilder/catching(java.lang.constant.ClassDesc,java.util.function.Consumer)/0/0",
>
> // making this method null-hostile caus
On Tue, 3 Sep 2024 01:58:59 GMT, Chen Liang wrote:
>> The test is inspired from [FFM API's
>> TestNulls](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/master/test/jdk/java/foreign/TestNulls.java),
>> I customized their Null checking framework it to work with ClassFile API.
>>
>> The framework for for te
On Mon, 12 Aug 2024 17:23:15 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> The test is inspired from [FFM API's
> TestNulls](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/master/test/jdk/java/foreign/TestNulls.java),
> I customized their Null checking framework it to work with ClassFile API.
>
> T
The test is inspired from [FFM API's
TestNulls](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/master/test/jdk/java/foreign/TestNulls.java),
I customized their Null checking framework it to work with ClassFile API.
The framework for for testing an API in bulk, so that all methods are
reflectively called w
On Fri, 28 Jun 2024 13:36:32 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
>> This checker checks the values of the `@since` tag found in the
>> documentation comment for an element against the release in which the
>> element first appeared.
>>
>> Real since value of an API ele
On Fri, 19 Jul 2024 11:11:38 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Can I get a review for this change that fixes some broken links in javadoc
> comments? The new docs are hosted
> [here](https://cr.openjdk.org/~nbenalla/GeneratedDocs/8336039-warnings-links/).
>
> It's mostly fixing
On Sun, 21 Jul 2024 21:15:03 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
>> Can I get a review for this change that fixes some broken links in javadoc
>> comments? The new docs are hosted
>> [here](https://cr.openjdk.org/~nbenalla/GeneratedDocs/8336039-warnings-links/).
>>
>> It
On Sat, 20 Jul 2024 15:10:10 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> Nizar Benalla has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Update src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/foreign/MemorySegment.java
>>
>
> Can I get a review for this change that fixes some broken links in javadoc
> comments? The new docs are hosted
> [here](https://cr.openjdk.org/~nbenalla/GeneratedDocs/8336039-warnings-links/).
>
> It's mostly fixing some relative links.
> If using `{@docroot}` isn't ideal I can change it.
>
>
> Can I get a review for this change that fixes some broken links in javadoc
> comments? The new docs are hosted
> [here](https://cr.openjdk.org/~nbenalla/GeneratedDocs/8336039-warnings-links/).
>
> It's mostly fixing some relative links.
> If using `{@docroot}` isn't ideal I can change it.
>
>
> Can I get a review for this change that fixes some broken links in javadoc
> comments? The new docs are hosted
> [here](https://cr.openjdk.org/~nbenalla/GeneratedDocs/8336039-warnings-links/).
>
> It's mostly fixing some relative links.
> If using `{@docroot}` isn't ideal I can change it.
>
>
On Fri, 19 Jul 2024 13:08:06 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
>> Can I get a review for this change that fixes some broken links in javadoc
>> comments? The new docs are hosted
>> [here](https://cr.openjdk.org/~nbenalla/GeneratedDocs/8336039-warnings-links/).
>>
>> It
On Fri, 19 Jul 2024 12:44:47 GMT, Daniel Jeliński wrote:
>> Nizar Benalla has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> remove docroot based on review
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/concu
> Can I get a review for this change that fixes some broken links in javadoc
> comments? The new docs are hosted
> [here](https://cr.openjdk.org/~nbenalla/GeneratedDocs/8336039-warnings-links/).
>
> It's mostly fixing some relative links.
> If using `{@docroot}` isn't ideal I can change it.
>
>
Can I get a review for this change that fixes some broken links in javadoc
comments? The new docs are hosted
[here](https://cr.openjdk.org/~nbenalla/GeneratedDocs/8336039-warnings-links/).
It's mostly fixing some relative links.
If using `{@docroot}` isn't ideal I can change it.
Here is the res
On Thu, 11 Jul 2024 20:55:29 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Can I please get a review for this small change, the relative link to the
> stylesheet isn't needed as it wasn't used anyway in the generated HTML. The
> correct link to the stylesheet is already in the generated HTM
On Thu, 11 Jul 2024 20:55:29 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Can I please get a review for this small change, the relative link to the
> stylesheet isn't needed as it wasn't used anyway in the generated HTML. The
> correct link to the stylesheet is already in the generated HTM
Can I please get a review for this small change, the relative link to the
stylesheet isn't needed as it wasn't used anyway in the generated HTML. The
correct link to the stylesheet is already in the generated HTML.
This is the difference between the generated docs before and after this change,
On Thu, 4 Jul 2024 18:04:27 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Please review this simple doc only change.
> Some methods in ClassFile API were renamed recently as part of
> [JDK-8335290](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8335290) and
> [JDK-8335110](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-
On Thu, 4 Jul 2024 18:04:27 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Please review this simple doc only change.
> Some methods in ClassFile API were renamed recently as part of
> [JDK-8335290](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8335290) and
> [JDK-8335110](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-
On Thu, 4 Jul 2024 18:04:27 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Please review this simple doc only change.
> Some methods in ClassFile API were renamed recently as part of
> [JDK-8335290](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8335290) and
> [JDK-8335110](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-
On Thu, 4 Jul 2024 18:04:27 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Please review this simple doc only change.
> Some methods in ClassFile API were renamed recently as part of
> [JDK-8335290](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8335290) and
> [JDK-8335110](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-
Please review this simple doc only change.
Some methods in ClassFile API were renamed recently as part of
[JDK-8335290](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8335290) and
[JDK-8335110](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8335110) and need to have
`@since 24`, as they are essentially new methods.
On Thu, 25 Apr 2024 14:29:27 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Please review this PR that aims to add all the remaining needed `@since` tags
> in `java.base`, and group them into a single fix.
> This is related to #18934 and my work around the `@since` checker feature.
> Explicit `@sin
On Fri, 28 Jun 2024 11:11:51 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
>> Please review this PR that aims to add all the remaining needed `@since`
>> tags in `java.base`, and group them into a single fix.
>> This is related to #18934 and my work around the `@since` checker feature.
>>
On Mon, 3 Jun 2024 17:26:52 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Can I please get a review for this small change? The motivation is that javac
> does not recognize `package.html` files.
>
> The conversion was simple, I used a script to rename the files, append "*" on
> the
On Tue, 2 Jul 2024 16:24:49 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
>> Can I please get a review for this small change? The motivation is that
>> javac does not recognize `package.html` files.
>>
>> The conversion was simple, I used a script to rename the files, append "*&quo
On Tue, 2 Jul 2024 15:09:49 GMT, Aleksei Efimov wrote:
>> Nizar Benalla has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Improve package description based on Efimov's suggestion
>
> src/java.nami
he
> conversion in place, renaming them in git but with the big amount of change
> `git` thinks it's a new file.
>
> I also added a new `package-info.java` file to `javax.naming.ldap.spi`. I
> hope that's fine.
Nizar Benalla has updated the pull request incrementally w
> historical data built into `javac` which only goes back that far
>
> The intial comment at the beginning of `SinceChecker.java` holds more
> information into the program.
>
> I already have filed issues and fixed some wrong tags like in #18640, #18032,
> #18030, #18055, #18373, #18954,
On Tue, 25 Jun 2024 08:29:42 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
>> This checker checks the values of the `@since` tag found in the
>> documentation comment for an element against the release in which the
>> element first appeared.
>>
>> Real since value of an API ele
ocs somewhere if that is needed.
>
> src="https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/assets/96922791/89b92288-9b5e-48ed-8fa1-9342ea43e043";>
>
> src="https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/assets/96922791/9aef08ff-5030-4189-a996-582a7eef849b";>
>
> src="https://github
On Thu, 27 Jun 2024 10:27:03 GMT, Aleksei Efimov wrote:
>> Nizar Benalla 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 contai
1 - 100 of 181 matches
Mail list logo
