On Mon, 6 Jul 2026 23:36:05 GMT, Chen Liang <[email protected]> wrote:
> `ValueBased` talks about constructor avoidance but does not specify the > reason. It's better to include the reason because it's not straightforward > from the fact that there's no binary incompatibility. > > Also `InvalidClassException` benefits from descriptions about > strictly-initialized fields. > > --------- > - [x] I confirm that I make this contribution in accordance with the [OpenJDK > Interim AI Policy](https://openjdk.org/legal/ai). src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/doc-files/ValueBased.html line 36: > 34: {@code java.time.LocalDate}, are <em>value-based</em>. > 35: The compiler and runtime enforce the value based properties below if it > is declared > 36: as {@code value class} and preview features are enabled. I made this comment somewhere else, but it may have been dropped: Identity classes can be "value-based". It doesn't really make sense to talk about a "value-based value class"—that's just a value class. Everything in this file is directed towards identity classes. Suggest deleting this sentence. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/valhalla/pull/2631#discussion_r3597092441
