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
