On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 19:34:33 GMT, Pavel Rappo wrote:
> People rarely include JDK elements with package access in a javadoc run. That
> is why bugs in those elements' doc comments tend to remain unnoticed.
>
> There are many more bugs in the doc comments of the JDK elements with the
> package a
On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 19:34:33 GMT, Pavel Rappo wrote:
> People rarely include JDK elements with package access in a javadoc run. That
> is why bugs in those elements' doc comments tend to remain unnoticed.
>
> There are many more bugs in the doc comments of the JDK elements with the
> package a
On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 19:34:33 GMT, Pavel Rappo wrote:
> People rarely include JDK elements with package access in a javadoc run. That
> is why bugs in those elements' doc comments tend to remain unnoticed.
>
> There are many more bugs in the doc comments of the JDK elements with the
> package a
People rarely include JDK elements with package access in a javadoc run. That
is why bugs in those elements' doc comments tend to remain unnoticed.
There are many more bugs in the doc comments of the JDK elements with the
package access than are addressed by this PR; I only included the simplest
> Supporting `IsoFields` temporal fields in chronologies that are similar to
> ISO chronology. Corresponding CSR has also been drafted.
Naoto Sato 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 Thu, 14 Apr 2022 20:16:21 GMT, Bradford Wetmore wrote:
>> I ran `codespell` on the `src/java.base` directory, and accepted those
>> changes where it indeed discovered real typos.
>>
>> (Due to false positives this can unfortunately not be run automatically)
>>
>> The majority of fixes are
On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 19:07:09 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> I ran `codespell` on the `src/java.base` directory, and accepted those
> changes where it indeed discovered real typos.
>
> (Due to false positives this can unfortunately not be run automatically)
>
> The majority of fixes are in c
On Fri, 15 Apr 2022 11:25:09 GMT, Pavel Rappo wrote:
>> I ran `codespell` on the `src/java.base` directory, and accepted those
>> changes where it indeed discovered real typos.
>>
>> (Due to false positives this can unfortunately not be run automatically)
>>
>> The majority of fixes are in co
On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 19:07:09 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> I ran `codespell` on the `src/java.base` directory, and accepted those
> changes where it indeed discovered real typos.
>
> (Due to false positives this can unfortunately not be run automatically)
>
> The majority of fixes are in c
On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 19:07:09 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> I ran `codespell` on the `src/java.base` directory, and accepted those
> changes where it indeed discovered real typos.
>
> (Due to false positives this can unfortunately not be run automatically)
>
> The majority of fixes are in c
10 matches
Mail list logo
