On Thu, 31 Oct 2024 11:48:27 GMT, Nizar Benalla <nbena...@openjdk.org> wrote:
> Please review this patch to prevent links to private and package-private
> members to be generated.
> The bug happens when you link to private/package-private members, and javadoc
> used to generated links to them (assuming they were inherited because the
> holder is unreachable).
>
> Taking the code path I changed is very rare, as it only used by 4 anchors in
> 4 classes in all the JDK.
>
> if (refSignature.trim().startsWith("#") &&
> ! (utils.isPublic(containing) ||
> utils.isLinkable(containing))
>
>
> The classes that used it are `StringBuilder`/`StringBuffer` with
> `#append(java.lang.String)` and `ZipEntry`/`ZipOutputStream` with `#CENHDR`
>
>
> I've expanded the test to check whether the links are created when they
> should be.
>
> The generated documentation before and after the change are identical.
In the PR description you quote `StringBuilder#append(java.lang.String)` and
`ZipEntry#CENHDR` as examples for this problem, but those are both public
members. In the current JDK docs, I can only find a [link for the
latter][CENHDR] which is actually working.
[CENHDR]:
https://download.java.net/java/early_access/jdk24/docs/api/java.base/java/util/zip/ZipEntry.html#CENHDR
src/jdk.javadoc/share/classes/jdk/javadoc/internal/doclets/formats/html/taglets/LinkTaglet.java
line 253:
> 251: if (refSignature.trim().startsWith("#") &&
> 252: ! (utils.isPublic(containing) ||
> utils.isLinkable(containing)) &&
> 253: ! (utils.isPrivate(refMem)
> ||utils.isPackagePrivate(refMem))) {
Shouldn't this take into account whether we are running with -private or
-package options? Ideally using utils.isIncluded(Element) would take care of
this and give the right answer in all cases, although I haven't tried.
-------------
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/21802#issuecomment-2449737202
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/21802#discussion_r1824371918
