On Tue, 2 Nov 2021 19:15:26 GMT, Andrey Turbanov <d...@openjdk.java.net> wrote:
>> This PR follows up one of the recent PRs, where I used a non-canonical >> modifier order. Since the problem was noticed [^1], why not to address it at >> mass? >> >> As far as I remember, the first mass-canonicalization of modifiers took >> place in JDK-8136583 in 2015 [^2]. That change affected 1780 lines spanning >> 453 files. Since then modifiers have become a bit loose, and it makes sense >> to re-bless (using the JDK-8136583 terminology) them. >> >> This change was produced by running the below command followed by updating >> the copyright years on the affected files where necessary: >> >> $ sh ./bin/blessed-modifier-order.sh src/java.base >> >> The resulting change is much smaller than that of 2015: 39 lines spanning 21 >> files. >> >> [^1]: >> https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2021-November/082987.html >> (or https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/6191#pullrequestreview-794333365) >> [^2]: >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2015-September/035217.html > > src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/invoke/CallSite.java line 88: > >> 86: */ >> 87: public >> 88: abstract class CallSite { > > I think it's better to move all modifiers to the single line. This is a survivorship bias. This example jumps out at you, because it happens to use missorted modifiers. I'm pretty sure this is not an aberration, but a style. If you want to change that style, you should create a respective JBS issue. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/6213
