Re: JavaDoc fix in java.util.Date

2025-05-01 Thread Steffen Nießing
v >>> [](mailto:core-libs-dev-r...@openjdk.org) >>> on behalf of Naoto Sato >>> [](mailto:naoto.s...@oracle.com) >>> Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2025 3:11 PM >>> To: core-libs-dev@openjdk.org >>> [](mailto:core-libs-dev@openjdk.org) >>&g

Re: JavaDoc fix in java.util.Date

2025-04-30 Thread Steffen Nießing
ril 30, 2025 3:11 PM > To: core-libs-dev@openjdk.org > Subject: Re: JavaDoc fix in java.util.Date > > Interestingly, the implementation of Date.hashCode() does use the signed > right shift ">>". > > Naoto > > On 4/30/25 1:06 PM, Chen Liang wrote: >> Indeed

Re: JavaDoc fix in java.util.Date

2025-04-30 Thread Roger Riggs
libs-dev on behalf of Naoto Sato *Sent:* Wednesday, April 30, 2025 3:11 PM *To:* core-libs-dev@openjdk.org *Subject:* Re: JavaDoc fix in java.util.Date Interestingly, the implementation of Date.hashCode() does use the signed right shift ">>". Naoto On 4/30/25 1:06 PM, Chen Liang w

Re: JavaDoc fix in java.util.Date

2025-04-30 Thread Chen Liang
ie Cobbs Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2025 3:43 PM To: Steffen Nießing Cc: core-libs-dev@openjdk.org Subject: Re: JavaDoc fix in java.util.Date On Wed, Apr 30, 2025 at 3:38 PM Steffen Nießing mailto:zuniq...@protonmail.com>> wrote: However, the docs should match the expression used in

Re: JavaDoc fix in java.util.Date

2025-04-30 Thread Archie Cobbs
On Wed, Apr 30, 2025 at 3:38 PM Steffen Nießing wrote: > However, the docs should match the expression used in the implementation > when explicitly naming the returned expression. Should we update both to > Long.hashCode(this.getTime())? > I think that's a little too strong of a statement. Rathe

Re: JavaDoc fix in java.util.Date

2025-04-30 Thread Chen Liang
. From: core-libs-dev on behalf of Naoto Sato Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2025 3:11 PM To: core-libs-dev@openjdk.org Subject: Re: JavaDoc fix in java.util.Date Interestingly, the implementation of Date.hashCode() does use the signed right shift ">>&quo

Re: JavaDoc fix in java.util.Date

2025-04-30 Thread Naoto Sato
; core-libs- d...@openjdk.org *Subject:* Re: JavaDoc fix in java.util.Date Unsigned right shift is non-existent? "The operators << (left shift), >> (signed right shift), and >>> (unsigned right shift) are called the shift operators. The left-hand operand of a shift operator

Re: JavaDoc fix in java.util.Date

2025-04-30 Thread Chen Liang
behalf of Joseph D. Darcy Sent: Wednesday, April 30, 2025 2:54 PM To: Steffen Nießing ; core-libs-dev@openjdk.org Subject: Re: JavaDoc fix in java.util.Date Unsigned right shift is non-existent? "The operators << (left shift), >> (signed right shift), and >>> (unsigne

JavaDoc fix in java.util.Date

2025-04-30 Thread Steffen Nießing
Hello, I'm new to the OpenJDK community and plan to make my first change. I've found a small mistake in the documentation of java.util.Date#hashCode(). The documentation provides a Java expression of the returned value, which uses a non-existent operator '>>>'. Now I'm searching for a sponsor

Re: JavaDoc fix in java.util.Date

2025-04-30 Thread Joseph D. Darcy
Unsigned right shift is non-existent? "The operators << (left shift), >> (signed right shift), and >>> (unsigned right shift) are called the shift operators. The left-hand operand of a shift operator is the value to be shifted; the right-hand operand specifies the shift distance. " https://d