On Tue, 15 Nov 2022 18:47:39 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore <mcimadam...@openjdk.org> 
wrote:

>> This PR contains the API and implementation changes for JEP-434 [1]. A more 
>> detailed description of such changes, to avoid repetitions during the review 
>> process, is included as a separate comment.
>> 
>> [1] - https://openjdk.org/jeps/434
>
> Maurizio Cimadamore has updated the pull request incrementally with one 
> additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Fix typo in SegmentScope javadoc

src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/foreign/Arena.java line 132:

> 130:      * and all the memory segments associated with it can no longer be 
> accessed. Furthermore, any off-heap region of memory backing the
> 131:      * segments associated with that scope are also released.
> 132:      * @throws IllegalStateException if the arena has already been 
> {@linkplain #close() closed}.

JavaDoc was pointing to itself.
Suggestion:

     * @throws IllegalStateException if the arena has already been closed.

src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/foreign/MemorySegment.java line 109:

> 107:  * Finally, access operations on a memory segment are subject to the 
> thread-confinement checks enforced by the associated
> 108:  * scope; that is, if the segment is the {@linkplain 
> SegmentScope#global() global scope} or an {@linkplain SegmentScope#auto() 
> automatic scope},
> 109:  * it can be accessed by multiple threads. If the segment is associatd 
> with an arena scope, then it can only be

Typo:
Suggestion:

 * it can be accessed by multiple threads. If the segment is associated with an 
arena scope, then it can only be

src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/foreign/SegmentScope.java line 10:

> 8:  * A segment scope controls access to a memory segment.
> 9:  * <p>
> 10:  * A memory segment can only be accessed while its scope is {@linkplain 
> #isAlive() alive}. Moreoever,

Typo:
Suggestion:

 * A memory segment can only be accessed while its scope is {@linkplain 
#isAlive() alive}. Moreover,

-------------

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/10872

Reply via email to