On Thu, 8 Feb 2024 15:37:06 GMT, Pavel Rappo wrote:
>> Ping. I do believe that it's important to have such a test.
>
> Ping.
I believe this is substantially covered in line 226-227. See the third call to
`test` in the following group of lines:
for (String src : sources) {
test(src);
test(src.replaceAll("@Deprecated", "/** @deprecated */"));
test(src.replaceAll("deprecated", "notDeprecated2") // change
class name
.replaceAll("@Deprecated", "/// @deprecated\n"));
}
* The first call, `test(src)`, runs all the test cases, using the `@Deprecated`
annotation by default. In these test cases, the name of the element encodes
whether it is expected that the element is deprecated or not.
* The second call, `test(src.replaceAll("deprecated", "notDeprecated2")`, runs
the test cases again, after changing the annotation to a traditional (`/**
...*/`) comment containing the `@deprecated` tag. This is a long-standing call,
and tests the legacy behavior of `@deprecated` appearing in a traditional doc
comment. Effectively, it tests whether a `/** @deprecated */` comment has
equivalent behavior to a `@Deprecated` comment.
* The third call is new to this PR and the functionality to support Markdown
comments. It makes two changes to the source for the test cases, before
running them:
1. as in the previous test, the annotations are replaced by a comment
containing `@deprecated` -- except that this time, the comment is a new-style
`/// ... ` comment instead of a traditional `/** ... */` comment, and ...
2. because we do not expect `/// @deprecated` to indicate deprecation, we
need to change the expected result for each test case, which we do by changing
the element name for the test case. The change is the first call to replace to
avoid false positives after changing the doc comment. The change uses a new
name, `notDeprecated2`, in which `notDeprecated` encodes the expected
deprecation status, and the `2` is to differentiate the declarations from other
declarations in the case case that already use the name `notDeprecated`.
-
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16388#discussion_r1483582480
