On Mon, 13 May 2024 17:44:52 GMT, Nizar Benalla <d...@openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Please review this PR that aims to add all the remaining needed `@since` 
>> tags in `java.base`, and group them into a single fix.
>> This is related to #18934 and my work around the `@since` checker feature.
>> Explicit `@since` tags are needed for some overriding methods for the 
>> purpose of the checker.
>> 
>> I will only give the example with the `CompletableFuture` class but here is 
>> the before where the methods only appeared in "Methods declared in interface 
>> N"
>> 
>> <img width="1510" alt="Screenshot 2024-05-06 at 00 06 57" 
>> src="https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/assets/96922791/1749a355-133b-4a38-bffe-51ac415b2aac";>
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> and after where the method has it's own javadoc, the main description is 
>> added and the `@since` tags are added as intended.
>> 
>> I don't have an account on `https://cr.openjdk.org/` but I could host the 
>> generated docs somewhere if that is needed.
>> 
>> <img width="1511" alt="Screenshot 2024-05-06 at 00 07 16" 
>> src="https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/assets/96922791/89b92288-9b5e-48ed-8fa1-9342ea43e043";>
>> 
>> <img width="1505" alt="Screenshot 2024-05-06 at 00 08 06" 
>> src="https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/assets/96922791/9aef08ff-5030-4189-a996-582a7eef849b";>
>> 
>> <img width="1050" alt="Screenshot 2024-05-06 at 00 09 03" 
>> src="https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/assets/96922791/fdd75a26-0396-4c5e-8f59-a3717b7d7ec8";>
>> 
>> 
>> TIA
>
> Nizar Benalla has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional 
> commits since the last revision:
> 
>  - (C)
>  - (C)

src/java.base/share/classes/java/security/interfaces/RSAPrivateKey.java line 2:

> 1: /*
> 2:  * Copyright (c) 1998, 2023, Oracle and/or its affiliates. All rights 
> reserved.

This diff is redundant but no-op. You should merge openjdk/jdk's master branch 
to your PR branch, so the diff displayed by GitHub is up-to-date and this will 
go away.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/18954#discussion_r1598841666

Reply via email to