On Tue, 6 Jul 2021 17:48:48 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons <[email protected]> wrote:
> Please review a simple update to doclint, to generate messages for the
> "effectively missing" comment on default constructors on "normal" classes
> (not enums classes or record classes.)
>
> The change does affect a bunch of tests, mostly doclint tests, which all use
> atypical "toy" classes to host the comments to be tested, and which generally
> do not have explicit constructors ... and so trigger the new warning about
> using default constructors.
>
> There is no one solution applied to all tests. The general theme of the
> changes is to minimize the changes, and in almost all cases to avoid changing
> any "golden files" or "expected output".
>
> The following techniques are used to modify tests:
>
> where it does not significantly interact with other test options, disable the
> check for missing comments when that is not the primary function of the test
> where it would not affect any line numbers in any expected output, add an
> explicit no-args constructor at the end of the class body
> add an explicit no-args constructor on the same line as the opening { of the
> class body (i.e.in order not to change line numbers in reference output)
This pull request has now been integrated.
Changeset: c1c40489
Author: Jonathan Gibbons <[email protected]>
URL:
https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/commit/c1c404896ca2791ad348a4cf482beb2c2ad98464
Stats: 235 lines in 76 files changed: 121 ins; 4 del; 110 mod
8249634: doclint should report implicit constructor as missing javadoc comments
Reviewed-by: hannesw
-------------
PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/4695
