8016217: More javadoc warnings (original) (raw)

Sean Mullan sean.mullan at oracle.com
Tue Jun 11 12:08:36 UTC 2013

The changes to classes in the security component look fine. One question I have is about the change to javax/xml/crypto/dsig/Manifest.java. Was there a specific error here or did you just want to make this cleaner by removing all of the html special character handling? The reason I ask is that there are many other classes in javax.xml.crypto which have similar javadoc sections, so I am wondering if they have similar issues.

Thanks, Sean

On 06/10/2013 06:31 AM, Alan Bateman wrote:

About 8 months ago I tried an early build of doclint [1] and used it to fix up a bunch issues at the time [2]. It's been awhile, so I decided to try out the latest version to see how it has progressed. All I can say is "Yikes". The good news is that they reported against the original source and that makes it easy when compared to tools that validate the generated html. I decided to fix up a few issues, mostly syntax (escaping of > and < in_ _particular) and a few reference issues that were missed the last time_ _(or are new). There are thousands of other issues for anyone that wants_ _to jump in._ _I've put the webrev with the changes here:_ _http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~alanb/8016217/webrev/_ _In total this fixes ~500 issues, although 270 of those were coming from_ _java.sql.DatabaseMetaData due to the number of un-escaped usages of_ _"=>". In many cases, the changes are simply to use {@code ..} or replace with {@code ...}. It is tempting to just do a global replace on existing usages (would fixing up content that is escaped of course). I've run specdiff on the before & after to check that I didn't mess anything up. One obvious difference is that code examples that use generics now have the type parameters going through to the generated javadoc. The webrev touches many areas but as the changes are trivial, I don't need a reviewer from every area. -Alan. [1] http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/172 [2] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/tl/jdk/rev/39cbe256c3d1

More information about the core-libs-dev mailing list