On Thu, 1 May 2025 12:56:42 GMT, Chen Liang <li...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Markus KARG has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Applied proposal by Daniel: If there's no change to this file the
>> copyright year update could be reverted?
>
> src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/AbstractStringBuilder.java line 488:
>
>> 486: /**
>> 487: * {@inheritDoc CharSequence}
>> 488: */
>
> Suggestion:
>
> * {@inheritDoc CharSequence}
> * @param srcBegin {@inheritDoc CharSequence}
> * @param srcEnd {@inheritDoc CharSequence}
> * @param dst {@inheritDoc CharSequence}
> * @param dstBegin {@inheritDoc CharSequence}
> * @throws IndexOutOfBoundsException {@inheritDoc CharSequence}
> */
>
> Let's aim for text parity for now; can you create a bug for Javadoc for this
> inheritDoc inconsistency?
I can open a bug report, but I think text parity makes no sense: There are lots
of other places in OpenJDK where the short form is used already, so there will
not be any benefit of text parity with just one other code location, but it
will force use to open another JBS / PR once the bug is fixed to come back to
the short form. So it brings just work but we gain nothing IMHO.
-------------
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/21730#discussion_r2070246526
