Re: [9] RFR of 8074937: ServerSocket.accept() API Descriptions should include past tense

Identical verbiage is in fact also present in http://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/java/net/ServerSocket.html#ServerSocket-int-int- and http://docs.oracle.com/javase/8/docs/api/java/net/ServerSocket.html#ServerSocket-int-int-java.net.InetAddress- To wit: "The backlog argument is the reques

Re: [9] RFR of 8074937: ServerSocket.accept() API Descriptions should include past tense

Chris, Fine with me. I concur about the verbiage in the description. Alan, Thanks for the background and pointer to other clarifications. Brian On Mar 19, 2015, at 8:23 AM, Chris Hegarty wrote: > I would personally close this as 'not a bug'. > > I see no value in trying add additional clari

Re: [9] RFR of 8074937: ServerSocket.accept() API Descriptions should include past tense

I would personally close this as 'not a bug'. I see no value in trying add additional clarification around something that has never, to the best of my knowledge, been the source of confusion. The description in JIRA seems overly pedantic. -Chris. On 19/03/15 14:47, Alan Bateman wrote: On 19

Re: [9] RFR of 8074937: ServerSocket.accept() API Descriptions should include past tense

On 19/03/2015 14:30, Brian Burkhalter wrote: Please review at your convenience. This a doc-only change. Issue:https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8074937 Patch:http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpb/8074937/webrev.00/ This is in effect an a

[9] RFR of 8074937: ServerSocket.accept() API Descriptions should include past tense

Please review at your convenience. This a doc-only change. Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8074937 Patch: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpb/8074937/webrev.00/ This is in effect an amplification of extant javadoc suggested as an enhancement by an external user. I performed some te