On Thu, 2 Jun 2022 20:59:26 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons <j...@openjdk.org> wrote:
> Please review a moderate change to enable (most) doclet warnings even if > doclint is enabled. > > Since the introduction of doclint, there was some (small) overlap between the > small set of warnings generated by the doclet and the new larger set of > diagnostics that could be generated by doclint. The solution, until now, has > been to disable doclet warnings when doclint is enabled. But, the sets do not > overlap, and the policy has inappropriately suppressed some warnings and > inhibited the generation of new warnings by the doclet that could only be > done by the doclet, and not doclint. > > One notable group of warnings that has been inappropriately suppressed is the > warnings generated by using the `-serial warn` option. > > The fundamental core of the change is to remove the conditional checks in the > doclet `Messages.java`, which would suppress messages when doclint was > enabled. A consequence is that some specific messages have to disabled if > they are duplicate checks if doclint is enabled. (The messages cannot be > removed altogether because doclint might _not_ be enabled.) A test is added > to verify that either one message or the other is generated, but never both. > > As previously noted, an issue with the earlier policy is that warnings > generated by using the `-serial warn` option were inappropriately suppressed, > and this change fixes that ... revealing a number of latent warnings in the > JDK API that need to be addressed. The short term fix here is to temporarily > remove the use of the `-serialwarn` option. See > [JDK-8287749](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8287749). > Since the introduction of doclint, there was some (small) overlap between the > small set ... and the new larger set ... But, the sets do not overlap Do or do they not overlap? :) > the policy has inappropriately suppressed some warnings and inhibited the > generation of new warnings What's the difference between "suppressed" and "inhibited" here? Generally, how can we be sure that we haven't missed any double-reported cases? test/langtools/jdk/javadoc/doclet/testDoclintDocletMessages/TestDocLintDocletMessages.java line 136: > 134: var doclintResult = new Result(Exit.OK, "C.java:8: warning: > @param \"x\" has already been specified"); > 135: var docletResult = new Result(Exit.OK, "C.java:8: warning: > Parameter \"x\" is documented more than once."); > 136: Both are warnings, hence two `Exit.OK` results; I see. test/langtools/jdk/javadoc/doclet/testDoclintDocletMessages/TestDocLintDocletMessages.java line 190: > 188: checkExit(expect.exit); > 189: > 190: checkOutput(Output.OUT, true,expect.message); Add whitespace after `true,` ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/9006
