Hi Joe,
Looks fine.
Should the bug be labeled noreg-doc?
Is this worthy of a CSR? It seems like make-work except that it does change
the formal Java SE spec that is generated from javadoc.
Roger
On 5/19/19 3:09 PM, Joe Darcy wrote:
Hello,
While doing some other work, I noticed that java.lang.Number relies on
an implicit default constructor. Until there is a lint warning to find
these cases systematically (JDK-8071961: Add javac lint warning when a
default constructor is created), please review the diff below to
address this particular instance.
Thanks,
-Joe
public abstract class Number implements java.io.Serializable {
/**
+ * Constructor for subclasses to call.
+ */
+ public Number() {super();}
+
+ /**
