On Tue, 30 May 2023 23:57:23 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons <j...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> src/jdk.javadoc/share/classes/jdk/javadoc/internal/doclets/formats/html/TagletWriterImpl.java >> line 503: >> >>> 501: // A non-empty label is required for fragment links as >>> the >>> 502: // reference target does not provide a useful default >>> label. >>> 503: htmlWriter.messages.error(ch.getDocTreePath(refTree), >>> "doclet.link.see.no_label"); >> >> This is ... interesting. >> This method is called from various places, which is why we pass in a >> function to report diagnostics in the appropriate way for the caller >> (meaning, at the appropriate position.). It seems less than ideal to avoid >> using the function, but that being said, this codepath likely cannot occur >> in the most problematic situation, in snippets. >> >> I'm not (yet) sure what the right approach is here. Maybe we can move away >> from needing the `reportWarning` function. See PR #13811 for a separate PR >> in this area. >> >> Maybe/probably the better (future?) solution is to pass in the tree path for >> `refTree` instead of (just) `refTree` by itself. This could/should be used >> in all diagnostics and world obviate the need for the `reportWarning` >> function. It would still require a TODO in the snippet code, to replace the >> existing TODO to provide the function for `reportWarning`. > > Filed https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8309158 As far as I understand, the considerations about `reportWarning` do not affect this change. Is there anything that should be changed in this PR? ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/13720#discussion_r1214427143
