Neither of awt-dev or jdk-dev is the right list for this fix.
Please move the review to 2d-dev.
-phil.
On 8/17/20, 4:50 AM, Lance Andersen wrote:
Hi Daniel
On Aug 17, 2020, at 7:30 AM, Daniel Fuchs<daniel.fu...@oracle.com> wrote:
On 17/08/2020 12:16, Lance Andersen wrote:
The description for almost all of the constructors indicate:
————
Constructor for subclasses to call
——————
Is the above wording used elsewhere in the JDK? Not sure I like it, I might
suggest a little wordsmithing
As far as I know that's what Joe Darcy used to document
public implicit constructors in abstract classes in
recent similar cleanup patches, see for instance here:
http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~darcy/8250244.0/src/java.base/share/classes/java/net/SocketAddress.java.frames.html
I wouldn't use that description if the class could be instantiated,
but if it's abstract then we have a precedent...
Not sure if there is already a different convention for that
in 2D/AWT code base though.
If the wording is being used elsewhere, then we have a precedent. We should
probably discuss at some point do we want to revisit the wording throughout the
JDK for consistency.
Thank you for the follow up
best regards,
-- daniel
Best
Lance
------------------
Lance Andersen| Principal Member of Technical Staff | +1.781.442.2037
Oracle Java Engineering
1 Network Drive
Burlington, MA 01803
lance.ander...@oracle.com
