Thanks for the review. On 09/10/13 17:31, Joe Darcy wrote: > Hi Eric, > > Looks good, modulo some typos: > > 434 * this object. Synthetic and mandated parameters (see > 435 * explanation below), such as the inner this parameter to an > > Inner class constructors have an *outer* this parameter.
Argh! Fixed. > > 437 * array. If the executable has no parameters (including > 438 * synthetic and mandated parameters), ... > > For extra clarity, I would rephrase this as "... (including no synthetic > and no mandated parameters) ..." > I worded this as "If the executable has no parameters (meaning no formal, no synthetic, and no mandated...)" > Thanks, > > -Joe > > On 9/10/2013 6:28 AM, Eric McCorkle wrote: >> A new webrev has been posted, with some improvements to the comment. >> >> On 09/09/13 17:41, Eric McCorkle wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> Please review this patch which updates the javadoc comments for >>> java.lang.reflect.Executable.getParameterAnnotations(). The patch >>> corrects the javadocs to describe the actual behavior of this method. >>> It also refers users to the new java.lang.reflect.Parameter API. >>> >>> See comments on the bug report for more details: >>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-6962494 >>> >>> The webrev is here: >>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~emc/6962494/ >>> >>> This is also under review in crucible. The review link is here: >>> http://sthinfra10.se.oracle.com:8060/cru/CR-JDK8TL-171 >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Eric >>> >
