Xueming, I believe you still owe me a review and bug filed for http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~martin/webrevs/openjdk7/javadoc-unicode-escapes/
Martin On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 13:29, Martin Buchholz <marti...@google.com> wrote: > On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 12:46, Ulf Zibis<ulf.zi...@gmx.de> wrote: >> Am 02.09.2009 19:11, David M. Lloyd schrieb: >>> >>> On 09/02/2009 12:03 PM, Martin Buchholz wrote: >>>> >>>> On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 09:40, David M. Lloyd <david.ll...@redhat.com >>>> <mailto:david.ll...@redhat.com>> wrote: >>>> Why not just do {...@code \uD800}? I'm like 60% sure that would work >>>> just fine. :-) >>>> >>>> >>>> I'm pretty sure it would fail. Prove me wrong! >>>> Searching the JDK sources for regex >>>> ^ *\*.*\\u[0-9a-fA-F]{4} >>>> is a good way to find javadoc bugs, e.g. >>>> http://java.sun.com/javase/6/docs/api/java/lang/String.html#toLowerCase() >>> >>> Ah, you're right. It worked in my previewer but not in the actual >>> javadoc. It's pretty bad that that sequence has special meaning but you >>> can't escape a \ with another \. I guess in the worst case you could always >>> do \u005CD800 or something like that. >>> >> >> Looks little better, but not much. Did somebody tried it (Martin)? > > Well.... learn something new every day. > Let's turn this into a fix. > It's yet another "turkish i" bug. > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~martin/webrevs/openjdk7/javadoc-unicode-escapes/ > > Xueming, please file a bug and review. > > Synopsis: Unreadable \uXXXX in javadoc > Description: Replace \uXXXX by \u005CXXXX, or simply delete > > Martin > >> If it works in a previewer, is there any chance to change the javadoc spec, >> staying backwards compatible? >> >> -Ulf >> >> >> >
