On Thu, 10 Dec 2020 13:17:49 GMT, Hannes Wallnöfer <[email protected]> wrote:
> This change causes overriding methods to be documented in the details section
> under some conditions even when javadoc is run with
> `--override-methods=summary` and the method does not have a doc comment.
> Previously this already happened when the overriding method had a covariant
> return type (JDK-8219147). The following conditions will now trigger the same
> behaviour:
>
> - method visibility changes from `protected` to `public`
> - any change in thrown exceptions
> - change in documented annotations anywhere in the method signature
>
> The conditions are simple by intention as we don't want to do checks that add
> to much complexity (such as distinguishing between checked and unchecked
> exceptions) and instead want to set the bar for inclusion in the details
> section relatively low.
This looks good, but given the noteworthy and significant changes in
`VisibleMemberTable`,
I'd like to suggest you address JDK-8258429 at this time, which has significant
overlap.
src/jdk.javadoc/share/classes/jdk/javadoc/internal/doclets/toolkit/util/VisibleMemberTable.java
line 607:
> 605: // Check whether the signature of an overriding method has any
> changes worth
> 606: // being documented compared to the overridden method.
> 607: private boolean overridingSignatureChanged(ExecutableElement method,
> ExecutableElement overriddenMethod) {
In the body of this method, can you add in:
change in abstract/non-abstract (both ways)
change in final/non-final
-------------
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/1734
