On Tue, 24 Mar 2026 12:17:49 GMT, Jaikiran Pai <[email protected]> wrote:
> No objection to the current text in this PR. It's OK to go ahead with this > form. However, I wasn't thinking of specifying the behaviour of empty value > for the `comment`, because there's nothing special we do with empty vs > non-empty comment string. Including the mention of an empty comment was my initiative. My thinking was that now it isn't entirely clear if an empty comment would be allowed or rejected. It's a special / corner-case value which could raise questions if not mentioned. The current text specifies it as equivalent to null. On the other hand, the result is just a an empty comment, the file format doesn't really care. So perhaps mentioning is a bit redundant. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/30338#discussion_r2981177499
