On 6/5/24 2:51 AM, Osipov, Michael wrote:
On 2024-05-31 21:38, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
Michael,
There is no `element-list` file for any version of JDK before JDK 9.
Before JDK 9, the appropriate information was in the `package-list`
file. In JDK 9, with the introduction of modules, the format
Michael,
There is no `element-list` file for any version of JDK before JDK 9.
Before JDK 9, the appropriate information was in the `package-list`
file. In JDK 9, with the introduction of modules, the format of the file
was updated to include modules, and because this was an incompatible
ch
On Tue, 7 May 2024 11:53:19 GMT, Pavel Rappo wrote:
> Please review this mechanical change to man pages. This PR should be
> integrated after https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/18787.
Marked as reviewed by jjg (Reviewer).
-
PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/19119#pullre
On Thu, 18 Apr 2024 20:44:00 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
> Please review a set of updates to clean up use of `/**` comments in the
> vicinity of declarations.
>
> There are various categories of update:
>
> * "Box comments" beginning with `/**`
> * Misplaced
On Fri, 19 Apr 2024 19:29:31 GMT, Alexey Ivanov wrote:
> > We do not have an overall style guide. The conventional wisdom for editing
> > any existing file is to follow the style in that file, if such a style can
> > be discerned.
>
> That's what I do.
>
> I saw either style used in JDK. Yet
On Fri, 19 Apr 2024 20:38:05 GMT, Naoto Sato wrote:
> OK, fair enough. Approving for the `icu` part
Thank you.
-
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/18846#issuecomment-2067280359
On Fri, 19 Apr 2024 19:47:20 GMT, Naoto Sato wrote:
> Unless it is absolutely necessary, I would not fix comments in
> `jdk.internal.icu` sources, as they are in the upstream code, and would like
> to minimize the merging effort.
@naotoj Given the policy and strong desire to compile `java.base
On Fri, 19 Apr 2024 11:32:55 GMT, Pavel Rappo wrote:
> This comment is not a review. I simply use the opportunity provided by this
> PR to suggest that we stop making new `/** ... */` and separately fix old
> jtreg comments like this:
>
> ```
> /**
> * @test TestSmallHeap
> * @bug 8067438 81
On Thu, 18 Apr 2024 20:44:00 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
> Please review a set of updates to clean up use of `/**` comments in the
> vicinity of declarations.
>
> There are various categories of update:
>
> * "Box comments" beginning with `/**`
> * Misplaced
On Fri, 19 Apr 2024 10:49:11 GMT, Alexey Ivanov wrote:
>> Jonathan Gibbons has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Update
>> src/java.base/share/classes/sun/net/www/protocol/file/FileURL
comments before a declaration were merged, which fixes a
> bug/omission in the documented serialized form.
Jonathan Gibbons has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the last revision:
Update
src/java.base/share/classes/sun/net/www/protocol/file/FileURLConnec
On Fri, 19 Apr 2024 10:44:27 GMT, Alexey Ivanov wrote:
>> Please review a set of updates to clean up use of `/**` comments in the
>> vicinity of declarations.
>>
>> There are various categories of update:
>>
>> * "Box comments" beginning with `/**`
>> * Misplaced doc comments before package or
On Fri, 19 Apr 2024 10:53:11 GMT, Alexey Ivanov wrote:
>> Please review a set of updates to clean up use of `/**` comments in the
>> vicinity of declarations.
>>
>> There are various categories of update:
>>
>> * "Box comments" beginning with `/**`
>> * Misplaced doc comments before package or
Please review a set of updates to clean up use of `/**` comments in the
vicinity of declarations.
There are various categories of update:
* "Box comments" beginning with `/**`
* Misplaced doc comments before package or import statements
* Misplaced doc comments after the annotations for a declar
On Mon, 25 Mar 2024 22:51:48 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
>> For context, I am writing tests to check for accurate use of `@since` tags
>> in documentation comments in source code.
>> We're following these rules for now:
>>
>> ### Rule 1: Introduction of New Elements
>>
>> - If an element is new
On Tue, 5 Sep 2023 22:49:41 GMT, Erik Joelsson wrote:
> There are a number of files in the `test` directory that have an incorrect
> copyright header, which includes the "classpath" exception text. This patch
> removes that text from all test files that I could find it in. I did this
> using a
On Thu, 6 Jul 2023 16:41:37 GMT, Sean Mullan wrote:
>> Pavel Rappo has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes
>> brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains six additional
>> commits sin
On Tue, 13 Jun 2023 18:38:28 GMT, Naoto Sato wrote:
> Left some comments on the translations mainly in Japanese. It is now very
> easy to look at the l10n changes in the generated HTML. One small comment to
> the tool is that it would be nice if the order in HTML (alphabetically sorted
> curre
> Please review a doc update to add `@spec` into the rest of the files in
> `java.base` (compared to those in
> [JDK-8305206](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8305206) PR #13248)
Jonathan Gibbons has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
merge or a rebase. The in
On Thu, 8 Jun 2023 20:16:21 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
> I checked out references to `nist.gov`.
>
> I found 7 references to 4 documents:
>
> ```
> $ grep -r '*.*href=[^ ]*nist.gov' open/src/java.base | grep -o 'nist.gov[^"]*'
> nist.go
On Wed, 5 Apr 2023 16:45:06 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
>> Please review a doc update to add `@spec` into the rest of the files in
>> `java.base` (compared to those in
>> [JDK-8305206](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8305206) PR #13248)
>
> Jonathan Gibbons has
On Wed, 5 Apr 2023 16:45:06 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
>> Please review a doc update to add `@spec` into the rest of the files in
>> `java.base` (compared to those in
>> [JDK-8305206](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8305206) PR #13248)
>
> Jonathan Gibbons has
On Tue, 6 Jun 2023 22:01:10 GMT, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote:
> A trivial fix to ProblemList
> sun/security/pkcs11/Signature/TestRSAKeyLength.java on macosx-x64 and
> windows-x64.
>
> The test is already ProblemListed on linux-all.
Marked as reviewed by jjg (Reviewer).
-
PR Review
On Fri, 5 May 2023 14:28:01 GMT, Weijun Wang wrote:
> We have quite some `standard-names.html#anchorName` links (Ex:
>
> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/f804f2ce8ef7a859aae021b20cbdcd9e34f9fb94/src/java.base/share/classes/java/security/Signature.java#L111
>
> ). I don't see any of them here
On Fri, 14 Apr 2023 05:07:18 GMT, Bradford Wetmore wrote:
>> Jonathan Gibbons has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Address review feedback
>
> I'm coming to this late, but what is the bread
On Thu, 6 Apr 2023 19:31:32 GMT, Sean Mullan wrote:
> There are references to other specifications missing, like NIST Special
> Publication 800-90A Revision 1, referenced in `java.security.DrbgParameters`.
> I think there are others, I haven't done a thorough review yet. Will there be
> subseq
> Please review a doc update to add `@spec` into the rest of the files in
> `java.base` (compared to those in
> [JDK-8305206](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8305206) PR #13248)
Jonathan Gibbons has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the last
On Wed, 5 Apr 2023 15:23:21 GMT, Daniel Jeliński wrote:
>> Jonathan Gibbons has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Update src/java.base/share/classes/java/security/cert/X509Certificate.java
>>
> Please review a doc update to add `@spec` into the rest of the files in
> `java.base` (compared to those in
> [JDK-8305206](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8305206) PR #13248)
Jonathan Gibbons has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the last
Please review a doc update to add `@spec` into the rest of the files in
`java.base` (compared to those in
[JDK-8305206](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8305206) PR #13248)
-
Commit messages:
- JDK-8305406: Add @spec tags in java.base/java.* (part 2)
Changes: https://git.openjd
On Thu, 30 Mar 2023 17:24:11 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
> Please review a change to add `@spec` tags (and remove some equivalent `@see`
> tags) to the main "core-libs" packages in `java.base` module.
>
> This is similar to, and a subset of, PR #11073. That PR was with
On Fri, 31 Mar 2023 16:28:14 GMT, Sean Mullan wrote:
> I didn't see any changes to security APIs - are they coming in a follow-on
> issue?
Yes, this is _Add `@spec` tags in java.base/java.* (part 1)_
The rest of `java.base` will be in part 2.
-
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/
80e62c4031c4c9752460de5f36c/make/Docs.gmk#L68
> [disabled]:
> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/83cf28f99639d80e62c4031c4c9752460de5f36c/make/Docs.gmk#L115
Jonathan Gibbons has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the last revision:
revert re
On Fri, 31 Mar 2023 17:14:01 GMT, Iris Clark wrote:
>> Jonathan Gibbons has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> address review feedback
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/java/io/ObjectOutputStream.jav
On Fri, 31 Mar 2023 10:45:39 GMT, Lance Andersen wrote:
> > Hi Jon,
> > This looks fine. I was wondering if we should do the same for java.util.zip
> > and the PKWare Zip Spec or where java.sql references the JDBC Spec?
>
> Well, I must need coffee this morning as obviously JDBC is in the java.
80e62c4031c4c9752460de5f36c/make/Docs.gmk#L68
> [disabled]:
> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/83cf28f99639d80e62c4031c4c9752460de5f36c/make/Docs.gmk#L115
Jonathan Gibbons has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the last revision:
address revie
On Thu, 30 Mar 2023 17:24:11 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
> Please review a change to add `@spec` tags (and remove some equivalent `@see`
> tags) to the main "core-libs" packages in `java.base` module.
>
> This is similar to, and a subset of, PR #11073. That PR was with
On Thu, 30 Mar 2023 19:42:33 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> Please review a change to add `@spec` tags (and remove some equivalent
>> `@see` tags) to the main "core-libs" packages in `java.base` module.
>>
>> This is similar to, and a subset of, PR #11073. That PR was withdrawn, and
>> based on
Please review a change to add `@spec` tags (and remove some equivalent `@see`
tags) to the main "core-libs" packages in `java.base` module.
This is similar to, and a subset of, PR #11073. That PR was withdrawn, and
based on the ensuing discussion and suggestion, is now being handled with a
se
On Thu, 23 Feb 2023 09:04:23 GMT, Justin Lu wrote:
> This PR converts Unicode sequences to UTF-8 native in .properties file.
> (Excluding the Unicode space and tab sequence). The conversion was done using
> native2ascii.
>
> In addition, the build logic is adjusted to support reading in the
>
The message from this sender included one or more files
which could not be scanned for virus detection; do not
open these files unless you are certain of the sender's intent.
--
On Mon, 6 Mar 2023 20:22:48 GMT, Pavel Rappo wrote:
On Fri, 3 Mar 2023 11:31:04 GMT, Alexey Ivanov wrote:
>> Yes, iff means if-and-only-if and is used for extra precision in formal
>> logic, mathematics. As @pavelrappo points out it's a relatively common
>> occurrence in the OpenJDK sources, though perhaps not in the public
>> javadocs. Perhaps
On Fri, 13 Jan 2023 21:30:06 GMT, Joe Darcy wrote:
> With generalized see and link tags that can refer to anchors (JDK-8200337),
> the see and link tags in core libraries should be updated to use this feature
> when possible. This PR covers such updates for java.base.
Nice to see all those `ht
On Wed, 21 Dec 2022 21:38:22 GMT, Mark Powers wrote:
> https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8299230
Marked as reviewed by jjg (Reviewer).
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk20/pull/69
On Wed, 23 Nov 2022 23:04:36 GMT, Joe Wang wrote:
>> Jonathan Gibbons has updated the pull request incrementally with one
>> additional commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Remove updates from unexported files
>
> src/java.xml/share/classes/javax/xml/XMLCo
On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 23:51:19 GMT, Naoto Sato wrote:
>> Jonathan Gibbons has updated the pull request with a new target base due to
>> a merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes
>> brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contai
.java.net/~jjg/8296546/api.00/external-specs.html)
> page, which you can also find via the new link near the top of the
> [Index](http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jjg/8296546/api.00/index-files/index-1.html)
> pages.
Jonathan Gibbons has updated the pull request with a new target base due to
On Wed, 23 Nov 2022 19:20:53 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
> The java.base/net/, java.http/, java.naming/ changes look reasonable to me -
> though like Alan I wonder if it wouldn't be better to have an inline `{@spec
> }` tag - similar to `{@systemProperty }`, rather than repeating all the
> refere
.java.net/~jjg/8296546/api.00/external-specs.html)
> page, which you can also find via the new link near the top of the
> [Index](http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jjg/8296546/api.00/index-files/index-1.html)
> pages.
Jonathan Gibbons has updated the pull request incrementally with one addi
On Wed, 23 Nov 2022 12:43:16 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
> Thanks for adding the RFC prefix to the RFC link. What is the purpose of
> editing non exported classes though, like those in the `sun.net` subpackages?
That was not intentional, and is a result of the scripted edit. I will look to
r
.java.net/~jjg/8296546/api.00/external-specs.html)
> page, which you can also find via the new link near the top of the
> [Index](http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jjg/8296546/api.00/index-files/index-1.html)
> pages.
Jonathan Gibbons has updated the pull request incrementally with one ad
On Thu, 17 Nov 2022 22:23:53 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
> Please review an update for the troff man pages, following the recent update
> to upgrade to use pandoc 2.19.2
> (See https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8297165)
>
> In conjunction with this, one javadoc test also need
t generated by the new version of pandoc.
Jonathan Gibbons has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains three commits:
- Fix merge issue
- Merge with upstream/master
- JDK-8297164: Update troff man pages and CheckM
On Fri, 18 Nov 2022 02:31:19 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
> Hi @jonathan-gibbons ,
>
> I notice that in the new version dash characters are no longer escaped as
> `-`, do these still display correctly?
Yes, at least in all the files I verified and I have no reason to believe
Please review an update for the troff man pages, following the recent update to
upgrade to use pandoc 2.19.2
(See https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8297165)
In conjunction with this, one javadoc test also needs to be updated, to work
with the new form of output generated by the new version of
On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 16:33:09 GMT, AJ1062910 wrote:
> did you changed 420 files ?
I ran a custom utility that edited these files, yes.
-
PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/11073
On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 12:01:11 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
> I'm trying to understand what "fix-ups" will be needed if the automated patch
> is applied. In some cases, it looks the same spec will be linked from "See
> also" and "External Specifications", e.g.
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jjg/82965
On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 11:45:39 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote:
> > When referencing an RFC, it might be good to keep the RFC number in the
> > text link. For instance I see that java.net.URL now has this:
>
> I agree and also to add that some RFCs have commas in their titles, the same
> separator used
On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 11:30:51 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
> Hi Jon,
>
> When referencing an RFC, it might be good to keep the RFC number in the text
> link. For instance I see that java.net.URL now has this:
>
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jjg/8296546/api.00/java.base/java/net/URL.html
>
> Extern
Please review a "somewhat automated" change to insert `@spec` tags into doc
comments, as appropriate, to leverage the recent new javadoc feature to
generate a new page listing the references to all external specifications
listed in the `@spec` tags.
"Somewhat automated" means that I wrote and u
On Fri, 28 Oct 2022 14:54:26 GMT, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
>> Deprecate URL constructors. Developers are encouraged to use `java.net.URI`
>> to parse or construct any URL.
>>
>> The `java.net.URL` class does not itself encode or decode any URL components
>> according to the escaping mechanism defin
On Mon, 24 Oct 2022 19:21:07 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> Properties files is essentially source code. It should have the same
>> whitespace checks as all other source code, so we don't get spurious
>> trailing whitespace changes.
>>
>> With the new Skara jcheck, it is possible to increas
On Sun, 17 Jul 2022 22:44:02 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
> Please review these changes to the nroff manpage files so that they match
> their markdown sources that Oracle maintains.
>
> All pages at a minimum have 19-ea replaced with 19, and copyright set to 2022
> if needed. Additionally:
>
> T
On Sun, 17 Jul 2022 22:44:02 GMT, David Holmes wrote:
> Please review these changes to the nroff manpage files so that they match
> their markdown sources that Oracle maintains.
>
> All pages at a minimum have 19-ea replaced with 19, and copyright set to 2022
> if needed. Additionally:
>
> T
64 matches
Mail list logo
