Hi Martin,
Since very few developers will care about this case, it doesn't seem
necessary to
repeat the javadoc unless consistency is more important than readability.
In Runtime, the change is in the full exec method; all of the other
exec methods are
described as convenience methods and explicitly refer to the full exec
method.
Roger
On 1/30/2015 12:44 PM, Martin Buchholz wrote:
Seems OK, but:
UOE should be specified in ProcessBuilder if and only if it is also
specified for the Runtime.exec family of methods, since they are
wrappers around ProcessBuilder.
Because there are so many methods, it may be better to have a blanket
UOE disclaimer added to the class descriptions instead - adding UOE to
every process-related method exceeds the normal bar for pedantry in
the JDK documentation.
On Fri, Jan 30, 2015 at 7:58 AM, Roger Riggs <roger.ri...@oracle.com
<mailto:roger.ri...@oracle.com>> wrote:
Please review this clarification to the optional behavior of
java.lang.Runtime and java.lang.ProcessBuilder
on platforms that don't support process creation.
Webrev:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rriggs/webrev-process-8055330/
<http://cr.openjdk.java.net/%7Erriggs/webrev-process-8055330/>
Issue:
8055330 https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8055330
ps: approved by CCC
