On Thu, 4 Feb 2021 13:18:09 GMT, Hannes Wallnöfer <hann...@openjdk.org> wrote:
> This change improves support for the `@hidden` tag to suppress documentation
> for specific elements, especially in the context of classes, interfaces and
> inheritance/method overriding.
>
> The important changes are in `Utils` and in `VisibleMemberTable`. (There is
> also a number of non-related small code cleanup changes, sorry about that, I
> know it makes review a bit harder but I couldn't resist.)
>
> In `Utils` the most important change are:
>
> - Consider types as "undocumented enclosures" if they are marked with a
> `@hidden` tag
> - Check for `@hidden` tags even in non-included elements as they may be
> included via undocumented enclosures
> - To counter the above change, only run doclint on elements that are either
> included or contained in an included type, as we don't want to report
> warnings or errors for non-included code.
>
> In `VisibleMemberTable` there is a subtle change to not consider an
> overriding method as a "simple override" if the overridden method is hidden
> or otherwise invisible but in turn is a non-simple override of a method
> further up the inheritance chain. This resulted in methods which should have
> been documented as declared locally to be documented as declared in
> supertypes. I also did a bit of renaming in `VisibleMemberTable` to make the
> purpose of things a bit clearer.
>
> Other than that, most of the changes consist of added calls to
> `utils.hasHiddenTag(Element)`, usually with the purpose of not generating
> links to things that are not there.
src/jdk.javadoc/share/classes/jdk/javadoc/internal/doclets/toolkit/util/Utils.java
line 1567:
> 1565: // prevent needless tests on elements which are neither
> included nor selected.
> 1566: // Non-included members may still be visible via "transclusion"
> from undocumented enclusure
> 1567: if (!isIncluded(e) && !configuration.docEnv.isSelected(e)) {
This comment applies to the whole of this method body.
I think the `@hidden` (or `@treatAsprivate`) tag is sufficiently special that
it should be handled separately, especially in the cases where the containing
comment would not otherwise be read, because the element is not
included/selected. See other/earlier comments about avoiding `getDocComment`
and going to the underlying `getDocCommentInfo`, which will (should?)
completely bypass `getDocComment` and (importantly) the use of doclint.
-------------
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/2406
