On Tue, 16 Sep 2025 17:10:18 GMT, Pavel Rappo <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Please review this documentation-only change, which I believe does **NOT**
>> require CSR.
>>
>> The change touches java.time.** classes that I happen to have been using a
>> lot recently. While the diff is pretty self-describing, here's the summary
>> of what I did:
>>
>> * used a comma separator for some big integer values, to improve readability;
>> * fixed a few typos and grammar.
>>
>> While I'm open to discuss the change, I also have some questions. Note: I'm
>> not attempting to address those questions in this PR.
>>
>> * What's the significance of the second argument in
>> Duration.between(Temporal, Temporal) being exclusive? For example, would the
>> result of the following call be different if the second argument was
>> inclusive?
>>
>> Duration.between(Instant.ofEpochSecond(1), Instant.ofEpochSecond(2))
>>
>> Are there any cases here where that distinction matters?
>>
>> * In many cases, the following phrase is used throughout documentation:
>>
>> > positive or negative
>>
>> While the intent is clearly to stress the directed nature of values,
>> shouldn't we -- for completeness -- also mention zero where applicable?
>>
>> * What's the significance of title-case for Java Time-Scale? FWIW, the
>> documentation also uses "Java time-scale".
>
> Pavel Rappo has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> An empty commit to kick GHA
src/java.base/share/classes/java/time/Duration.java line 480:
> 478: * <p>
> 479: * The result of this method can be a negative duration if the end
> is before the start.
> 480: * To guarantee a positive or zero duration call {@link #abs()} on
> the result.
A bit of a quibble here. Checking the spec of the `isPositive()` method, it
does not include zero.
If the you intend the "positive" to be the same as the result of the
`isPositive` method then I think its best to omit the "zero". The `abs` method
would not change anything to be a zero.
-------------
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/27296#discussion_r2353654990
