Re: RFR: 8284209: Replace remaining usages of 'a the' in source code

2022-05-18 Thread Daniel Fuchs
On Wed, 18 May 2022 14:46:42 GMT, Alexey Ivanov wrote: > Replaces usages of articles that follow each other in all combinations: > a/the, an?/an?, the/the… > > It's the last issue in the series, and it still touches different areas of > the code. Logging/JNDI OK - Marked as revi

Re: RFR: 8280400: JDK 19 L10n resource files update - msgdrop 10

2022-03-10 Thread Daniel Fuchs
On Thu, 10 Mar 2022 17:00:09 GMT, Naoto Sato wrote: > IIRC, localized resource files should have the same copyright year as the > base English one. That's what I was told by the l10n engineer when I had the > same comment. Thanks Naoto! I have no objection then. - PR: https://git

Re: RFR: 8280400: JDK 19 L10n resource files update - msgdrop 10

2022-03-10 Thread Daniel Fuchs
On Wed, 9 Mar 2022 21:09:30 GMT, Alisen Chung wrote: > msg drop for jdk19, Mar 9, 2022 For simple webserver resource files - should the copyright year be 2022? - PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/7765

Re: RFR: 8277847: Support toolGuide tag in class-level documentation

2021-11-26 Thread Daniel Fuchs
On Fri, 26 Nov 2021 14:31:04 GMT, Julia Boes wrote: >> make/jdk/src/classes/build/tools/taglet/ToolGuide.java line 159: >> >>> 157: .toString() >>> 158: .replace('.', '/') >>> 159: .replaceAll("[^/]+", ".."); >> >> If the c

Re: RFR: 8277847: Support toolGuide tag in class-level documentation

2021-11-26 Thread Daniel Fuchs
On Thu, 25 Nov 2021 15:58:58 GMT, Julia Boes wrote: > This change adds support for the `@toolGuide` tag in class-level API > documentation. > > (A use case is the jwebserver tool, where the > com.sun.net.httpserver.SimpleFileServer class provides API points for > extension and customization

Re: RFR: JDK-8275518: accessibility issue in Inet6Address docs

2021-10-26 Thread Daniel Fuchs
On Tue, 19 Oct 2021 13:50:20 GMT, Ludvig Janiuk wrote: > Single-row table was being used as a hack here, a description list > seems more appropriate Hi Ludwik, it's the first time I see ``, ``, and `` being used in API documentation so I'd like to see some confirmation from the javadoc team th

Re: RFR: 8248001: javadoc generates invalid HTML pages whose ftp:// links are broken

2021-08-27 Thread Daniel Fuchs
On Fri, 27 Aug 2021 08:23:17 GMT, Masanori Yano wrote: >> I would normally opt for a generic regexp-based solution such as proposed by >> @dfuch, but there is a security aspect to this as well (e.g. script >> invocation), so I'd go with the more conservative approach here to just add >> `ftp:`

Re: RFR: 8248001: javadoc generates invalid HTML pages whose ftp:// links are broken

2021-08-20 Thread Daniel Fuchs
On Fri, 20 Aug 2021 11:22:07 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote: >> src/jdk.javadoc/share/classes/jdk/javadoc/internal/doclets/formats/html/HtmlDocletWriter.java >> line 1703: >> >>> 1701: return text; >>> 1702: } >>> 1703: if (te

Re: RFR: 8248001: javadoc generates invalid HTML pages whose ftp:// links are broken

2021-08-20 Thread Daniel Fuchs
On Fri, 20 Aug 2021 10:48:10 GMT, Pavel Rappo wrote: >> Could you please review the 8248001 bug fixes? >> >> The problem is that javadoc generates invalid HTML pages whose ftp:// links >> are broken. The fix changes not to use protocol names directly, but to use >> regular expression. > > src/

Re: RFR: 8267184: JEP 411: Add -Djava.security.manager=allow to tests calling System.setSecurityManager

2021-05-18 Thread Daniel Fuchs
On Mon, 17 May 2021 17:51:36 GMT, Weijun Wang wrote: > Please review the test changes for [JEP > 411](https://openjdk.java.net/jeps/411). > > With JEP 411 and the default value of `-Djava.security.manager` becoming > `disallow`, tests calling `System.setSecurityManager()` need > `-Djava.secu

Re: RFR: JDK-8258602: JavaDoc field summary does not indicate final modifier [v2]

2021-04-30 Thread Daniel Fuchs
On Fri, 30 Apr 2021 09:46:08 GMT, Hannes Wallnöfer wrote: > Thanks for the review; I agree we should think about normalizing modifiers. > > FWIW, the JLS describes methods in final classes as merely "behaving as if > they were final" (8.4.3.3.), so at least technically it is still the modifier

Re: RFR: JDK-8258602: JavaDoc field summary does not indicate final modifier [v2]

2021-04-27 Thread Daniel Fuchs
On Tue, 27 Apr 2021 10:29:05 GMT, Hannes Wallnöfer wrote: >> I found that adding the `final` modifier does not add too much visual noise >> to the documentation. I didn't find any occurrence where there were more >> than two modifiers on a member summary (usually either `static final` or >> `p

Re: RFR: JDK-8260388: Listing (sub)packages at package level of API documentation [v2]

2021-03-24 Thread Daniel Fuchs
On 24/03/2021 15:04, Hannes Wallnöfer wrote: I have added a change to this PR to add a "Module" column to the related packages table if any of the packages is in a different module. Example output for the JDK libraries is available here (`java.lang`, `java.util` and `com.sun.tools.*` packages

Re: RFR: JDK-8260388: Listing (sub)packages at package level of API documentation

2021-03-11 Thread Daniel Fuchs
aware of the cross-module link. I’ll give it a try and see how it works. Thanks Daniel! Hannes Am 11.03.2021 um 10:50 schrieb Daniel Fuchs : Hi Hannes, I am a bit conflicted about this. I agree with you that the link from java.net to java.net.http can be useful. I guess my main gripe is the

Re: RFR: JDK-8260388: Listing (sub)packages at package level of API documentation

2021-03-11 Thread Daniel Fuchs
feature has a positive net benefit. But of course it can and should be improved further based on feedback we get. Hannes Am 10.03.2021 um 18:18 schrieb Daniel Fuchs : Hi Hannes, I wonder if it's a good idea (or not) to show "related" packages that come from other modules. For in

Re: RFR: JDK-8260388: Listing (sub)packages at package level of API documentation

2021-03-10 Thread Daniel Fuchs
Hi Hannes, I wonder if it's a good idea (or not) to show "related" packages that come from other modules. For instance - if you click on java.base, then on java.net, you see 2 related packages: - java.net.spi (which is in java.base) - java.net.http - which is in another module (java.net.h

Re: RFR: JDK-8262992: Improve `@see` output

2021-03-09 Thread Daniel Fuchs
On Tue, 9 Mar 2021 15:04:35 GMT, Hannes Wallnöfer wrote: > This changes the output for `@see` tags to a `` structure. A different > CSS style is used if any of the `@see` tag labels are longer than 30 > characters or contain a comma. > > The layout for the default CSS style is similar to the

Re: RFR: 8242652: Throw SkippedException if no JS engine availabe in TestSearchScript

2020-11-26 Thread Daniel Fuchs
On Thu, 26 Nov 2020 16:14:53 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote: > I would have expected: > > ``` > * @library /test/lib > ``` > > to do the trick. Oh - I see that `test/jdk/TEST.ROOT` has these three lines below, that `test/langtools/TEST.ROOT` doesn't seem to have. Maybe

Re: RFR: 8242652: Throw SkippedException if no JS engine availabe in TestSearchScript

2020-11-26 Thread Daniel Fuchs
On Thu, 26 Nov 2020 16:04:40 GMT, Hannes Wallnöfer wrote: >> This is a simple change to throw jtreg.SkippedException if no JavaScript >> engine is available to run the TestSearchScript test. In my previous attempt >> I tried to use the SkippedException class already present elsewhere in the >>

Documenting record compact constructor

2020-11-24 Thread Daniel Fuchs
Hi, What is the canonical way of documenting a record compact constructor? Consider the following dummy record class: = import java.util.Objects; /** * A class that represents a person's name. * * @param name the person's first name *