On Fri, 19 Dec 2025 16:58:33 GMT, Roger Riggs <[email protected]> wrote:
>> eunbin son has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> 8373661: Address code style feedback
>>
>> - Expanded wildcard imports to individual imports
>> - Simplified test messages to identify tests only
>> - Used Assertions.fail() where appropriate
>> - Kept assertTrue/assertFalse for isNull API tests
>>
>> Thanks to @RogerRiggs and @liach for the feedback.
>
> Comment on the description contents and formatting:
> Skara (the automation for OpenJDK PRs) adds its own content (using Markdown)
> at the end to document the progress and steps.
> The final bit of `preformatted` text in the description does not seem to be
> closed properly so the Skara comment shows up as raw Markdown.
Thank you for your feedback, @RogerRiggs and @liach.
I’ve reviewed all comments again and addressed each item as listed below:
• ✅ JUnit conversion (@RogerRiggs): Converted to JUnit format
with @Test annotations and the @run junit directive; removed the main() method.
• ✅ Wildcard imports (@RogerRiggs): Replaced wildcard imports
with explicit individual imports.
• ✅ Test message simplification (@RogerRiggs): All test messages
now use method names only.
• ✅ Exception message tests removal (@liach): Removed all
exception message assertions; tests now verify only the exception types using
assertThrows.
• ✅ Copyright year update (@RogerRiggs): Updated the copyright
header to include 2025.
• ✅ Verbose comments removal (@liach): Removed unnecessary
Javadoc and inline comments from the newly added test methods.
• ✅ Exception instance verification (@liach): Updated
testRequireNonNullWithSupplierThrowingException to allocate the exception
outside the lambda and use assertSame to verify that the same instance is
thrown.
All changes are included in the latest commit(s).
If I missed anything, please let me know and I’ll be happy to address it.
Please review when you have a chance.
-------------
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/28845#issuecomment-3679628190
