Re: RFR: JDK-8175036 All API docs should be built for HTML 5

There would be a global cleanup involved for --doclint-format html5 A CSS expert can probably suggest replacements. [javac] ... src/main/java/util/Deque.java:30: error: attribute border for table only accepts "" or "1", use CSS instead: BORDER [javac] * On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 3:42

Re: RFR: JDK-8175036 All API docs should be built for HTML 5

We probably want to set --doclint-format html5 for javac as well, for the benefit of compilations that run doclint. -- Jon On 4/20/17 3:20 PM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: We should switch all uses of the javadoc tool to generate documentation in HTML 5, using the -html5 option. Bug:

Re: Please review: JDK-8178725: provide way to link to external documentation

Thanks for all the comments and feed back, I will go with what we have, for now, likely its not the last time we will be touching this before jdk9 is done. Kumar On 2017-04-20 20:02, Jonathan Gibbons wrote: David, Magnus, Yes, this is somewhat Oracle-specific (more accurately it is

RFR: JDK-8175036 All API docs should be built for HTML 5

We should switch all uses of the javadoc tool to generate documentation in HTML 5, using the -html5 option. Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8175036 Patch inline: diff --git a/make/Javadoc.gmk b/make/Javadoc.gmk --- a/make/Javadoc.gmk +++ b/make/Javadoc.gmk @@ -84,7 +84,7 @@ # The

Re: Please review: JDK-8178725: provide way to link to external documentation

On 4/20/17 2:53 PM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: On 2017-04-20 20:02, Jonathan Gibbons wrote: David, Magnus, Yes, this is somewhat Oracle-specific (more accurately it is JDK-specific, which is why this is a proposed to be a JDK build-time taglet, and not a standard tag in the standard

Re: Please review: JDK-8178725: provide way to link to external documentation

OK by me. -- Jon On 04/19/2017 10:46 AM, Kumar Srinivasan wrote: Have made the following changes: * fixed the indentations, basically pointed the IDE and asked it to reformat the whole file * fixed regex, to be defensive against leading WS, though the DocCommentParser whacks the WS.

Re: RFR: JDK-8179022 Add serialization spec as markdown

> On Apr 20, 2017, at 11:47 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ihse/JDK-8179022-add-markdown-serialization-spec/webrev.02 A passing comment. Copyright header is missing in make/devkit/createPandocBundle.sh Mandy

Re: Review Request: JDK-8179035: Include tool modules in unified docs

The javadocs read fine. Probably need to update the copyright date for the module-info.java files Best Lance > On Apr 20, 2017, at 2:37 PM, Mandy Chung wrote: > > A few modules are missing in the unified docs such as jdk.jcmd, > jdk.jdwp.agent, jdk.jstatd, etc. Some

Re: RFR: JDK-8178038, JDK-8178039, JDK-8178316 Javadoc specs directory

> On Apr 20, 2017, at 9:55 AM, Alan Bateman wrote: > > On 20/04/2017 17:47, Mandy Chung wrote: > >> In this case, which module should jdwp-protocol.html spec belong to? Not >> jdk.jdwp.agent then. >> The suggestion of the modular specs layout in the docs bundle may

Re: RFR: JDK-8179022 Add serialization spec as markdown

Hi Magnus, How did you verify that the result was the same as the previous specification? It would have been good to separate the content changes from the other parts so they could be properly reviewed. The proposed markdown source does not favorably easily with the spec as I worked on it a

Re: RFR: JDK-8179022 Add serialization spec as markdown

On 2017-04-20 15:59, Alan Bateman wrote: On 20/04/2017 14:49, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: Here's the first step towards fixing JDK-8177434 . A framework is added for converting markdown specs to html using pandoc. The Java serialization spec is

Review Request: JDK-8179035: Include tool modules in unified docs

A few modules are missing in the unified docs such as jdk.jcmd, jdk.jdwp.agent, jdk.jstatd, etc. Some tool modules are providers and they were in the initial set. The modules that are neither a provider nor exporting any API package are missed in the initial patch.

Re: Please review: JDK-8178725: provide way to link to external documentation

Hi, An idea that might make it more flexible would be if the settable property used as the link used one of the familiar formatting substitution mechanisms so the id can be inserted in the link wherever it is needed. For example, the PrintStream formatting like %s. Alternatively, the {0}

Re: Please review: JDK-8178725: provide way to link to external documentation

David, Magnus, Yes, this is somewhat Oracle-specific (more accurately it is JDK-specific, which is why this is a proposed to be a JDK build-time taglet, and not a standard tag in the standard doclet), but it is no worse than the explicit Oracle-specific URLs that have been used up to now, or

Re: RFR: JDK-8178038, JDK-8178039, JDK-8178316 Javadoc specs directory

On 20/04/2017 17:47, Mandy Chung wrote: In this case, which module should jdwp-protocol.html spec belong to? Not jdk.jdwp.agent then. The suggestion of the modular specs layout in the docs bundle may not apply. jdwp-protocol.html is the JDWP protocol so it's implemented by both the debugger

Re: RFR: JDK-8178038, JDK-8178039, JDK-8178316 Javadoc specs directory

> On Apr 20, 2017, at 9:32 AM, Alan Bateman wrote: > > > > On 20/04/2017 17:26, Mandy Chung wrote: >> JDI and JDWP are not Java SE and no need to handle that. >> > Just a small correction to this. The JDWP spec is Java SE. JDI is course > JDK-specific, as is the

Re: RFR: JDK-8178038, JDK-8178039, JDK-8178316 Javadoc specs directory

> On Apr 20, 2017, at 12:37 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie > wrote: > > On 2017-04-20 01:11, Mandy Chung wrote: >>> On Apr 19, 2017, at 3:54 PM, Mandy Chung wrote: >>> >>> On Apr 19, 2017, at 5:36 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:

Re: RFR: JDK-8178038, JDK-8178039, JDK-8178316 Javadoc specs directory

On 20/04/2017 17:26, Mandy Chung wrote: JDI and JDWP are not Java SE and no need to handle that. Just a small correction to this. The JDWP spec is Java SE. JDI is course JDK-specific, as is the JDWP transport interface. -Alan

Re: RFR: JDK-8178037 Move information from jdi-overview.html into jdk.jdi module-info.java

> On Apr 20, 2017, at 12:57 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie > wrote: > > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ihse/JDK-8178037-fix-obsolete-overview-files/webrev.02/ Looks good. Mandy

Re: RFR: JDK-8179022 Add serialization spec as markdown

The build changes look good to me. I can't comment on the actual .md files. /Erik On 2017-04-20 15:49, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: Here's the first step towards fixing JDK-8177434 . A framework is added for converting markdown specs to html

Re: RFR: JDK-8179022 Add serialization spec as markdown

On 20/04/2017 14:49, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: Here's the first step towards fixing JDK-8177434 . A framework is added for converting markdown specs to html using pandoc. The Java serialization spec is added in markdown format as a proof of

RFR: JDK-8179022 Add serialization spec as markdown

Here's the first step towards fixing JDK-8177434 . A framework is added for converting markdown specs to html using pandoc. The Java serialization spec is added in markdown format as a proof of concept. I also reintroduced the functionality to

Re: Correct Compiler for ARM / Arch64 for the jdk8u forest? (-m64 not supported)

Hi Erik/Andrew/Dalibor, Ah that clears it up - we were getting confused with what port was in mainstream or not. OK, we'll pick the ssh://hg.openjdk.java.net/ aarch64-port/jdk8u for our Java 8 build (Zero is interesting, but of less use to the wider community) and then we'll see what happens for

Re: Correct Compiler for ARM / Arch64 for the jdk8u forest? (-m64 not supported)

If this is related to yesterday's similar query [0], then I assume you're using http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/ for the build. There is no dedicated ARM port in JDK 8u. You would need to build the Zero interpreter instead, if you are building from the forest above, or, as Andrew

Re: Correct Compiler for ARM / Arch64 for the jdk8u forest? (-m64 not supported)

I'm not familiar with building for arm/aarch64 on the native platform (i.e. not cross compiling) in jdk8u. It definitely looks like the configuration is confused. The command line for hotspot seems to think that it's supposed to produce an x86_64 binary using your aarch64 compiler. I suspect

Correct Compiler for ARM / Arch64 for the jdk8u forest? (-m64 not supported)

Hi all, We've been putting together a community build farm and have wrangled from ARM machines. We are building from jdk8u and have the following configuration: - A new configuration has been successfully created in

Re: RFR: JDK-8178037 Move information from jdi-overview.html into jdk.jdi module-info.java

On 20/04/2017 5:57 PM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: On 2017-04-20 04:21, David Holmes wrote: On 19/04/2017 10:54 PM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: With JDK-8172312, the file src/jdk.jdi/share/classes/jdi-overview.html is no longer included in the generated documentation. The information provided by

Re: RFR: JDK-8178038, JDK-8178039, JDK-8178316 Javadoc specs directory

On 20/04/2017 08:37, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: : I have two suggestions, but I don't know if either of them is possible: 1) Move the JDWP.java file to jdk.jdwp.agent, and make sure it's properly exported from jdk.jdwp.agent to jdk.jdi. (From my point of view, this seems like the logical thing

Re: RFR: JDK-8178037 Move information from jdi-overview.html into jdk.jdi module-info.java

On 2017-04-20 04:21, David Holmes wrote: On 19/04/2017 10:54 PM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: With JDK-8172312, the file src/jdk.jdi/share/classes/jdi-overview.html is no longer included in the generated documentation. The information provided by that file should move to

Re: RFR: JDK-8178038, JDK-8178039, JDK-8178316 Javadoc specs directory

On 2017-04-20 00:54, Mandy Chung wrote: On Apr 19, 2017, at 5:36 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: WebRev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ihse/JDK-8178038-javadoc-specs/webrev.01 368 JDWP_PROTOCOL := $(SUPPORT_OUTPUTDIR)/gensrc/jdk.jdi/jdwp-protocol.html 369 $(eval $(call SetupCopyFiles,