On Thu, 15 Jun 2023 02:38:08 GMT, Chen Liang <li...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> The API specification for descriptorString not being a strict inverse of >> Class::forName and MethodType::fromDescriptorString are not entirely correct. >> >> 1. Class::descriptorString was never an inverse of Class::forName, which >> takes a binary name instead. Class::getName was a partial inverse instead. >> 2. MethodType::toMethodDescriptorString ends with a meaningless sentence: >> "fromMethodDescriptorString, because the latter requires a suitable class >> loader argument.", and the "Note:" section can be replaced with an >> `@apiNote`. >> 3. Both of these didn't mention hidden classes (or other >> non-nominally-describable classes) as a reason that prevents the inversion >> operation, in addition to distinct classloaders. >> >> A few user-defined anchor links are replaced with updated javadoc link tag >> format as well. The explicit html-style links in `@see` tags are unchanged >> in order to retain the non-code output. >> >> The rendered specifications: >> https://cr.openjdk.org/~liach/8309819/04/java.base/java/lang/Class.html >> https://cr.openjdk.org/~liach/8309819/04/java.base/java/lang/invoke/MethodType.html > > Chen Liang has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional > commit since the last revision: > > Update the note for getName The api note is primarily regarding about 1-N Class instances from a class name because of different class loader. For cases that are not a loadable class name or not a type descriptor, the spec of `Class::forName` and `MethodType::fromMethodDescriptorString` should specify clearly. If not, we should clarify those specs rather than explaining the negative cases in the api note. I think these API specs can be improved especially `forName` doesn't talk about the name for array type which is a fully-qualified name. I'll create a PR for that and see if that helps the clarification. ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/14411#issuecomment-1595179872
