On Tue, 11 Jul 2023 17:54:23 GMT, Roger Riggs <[email protected]> wrote:
>> In java.time packages, clarify timeline order javadoc to mention "before"
>> and "after" in the value of the `compareTo` method return values.
>> Add javadoc @see tags to isBefore and isAfter methods
>>
>> Replace use of "negative" and positive with "less than zero" and "greater
>> than zero" in javadoc @return
>> The term "positive" is ambiguous, zero is considered positive and indicates
>> equality.
>
> Roger Riggs has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
> merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes
> brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains 12 additional
> commits since the last revision:
>
> - Improve wording and remove markup for clarity
> - Merge branch 'master' into 8310033-time-compareto
> - Correct the descriptions to correctly identify the compareTo return
> value < 0 as this is before that, and > 0 as this is after that.
> Thanks to a careful reviewer spotting my reversing of the conditions.
> - Improve the grammar of "the comparator value is" -> "the comparator value,
> that is"
> Thanks for the reminder.
> - Merge branch 'master' into 8310033-time-compareto
> - Improve descriptions to be more specific and remove inappropriate use of
> before/after
> Remove extra blank lines
> - Clarify return values of date time classes
> - Use {@code xxx} to highlight the comparison against the arg.
> Update copyrights.
> - Merge branch 'master' into 8310033-time-compareto
> - Clarify for Duration, AbstractChronology, and Chronology
> - ... and 2 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/cbbf7dea...1d39e2d4
Please re-review; its doc-only so can be still included in JDK 21.
-------------
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/14479#issuecomment-1644428298
