On Fri, 5 Apr 2024 07:31:47 GMT, Jaikiran Pai <j...@openjdk.org> wrote:
> Can I please get a review of this doc-only changes to java.net.ServerSocket > and java.net.Socket classes? > > As noted in https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8329745, these classes > currently refer to the legacy `java.net.SocketOptions` interface and instead > should be refering to the newer `java.net.StandardSocketOptions` class. The > commit in this PR updates such references. This change intentionally doesn't > do any code changes to use the `StandardSocketOptions` class - that can be > done separately if desired at a later point (after testing for any > compatibility issues). Finally, there are a few places in ServerSocket and > Socket documentation which will continue to refer to java.net.SocketOptions > legacy interface because few of the options aren't available in > StandardSocketOptions class (for example, `SO_TIMEOUT`). > > I ran `make docs-image` locally with this change and the generated doc looks > OK to me. src/java.base/share/classes/java/net/ServerSocket.java line 867: > 865: * setting of {@link StandardSocketOptions#SO_REUSEADDR > SO_REUSEADDR}. > 866: * <p> > 867: * The behaviour when {@link StandardSocketOptions#SO_REUSEADDR > SO_REUSEADDR} is I suppose the main question here is whether the description really needs to link to SO_REUSEADDR five times, it seems a bit excessive. In cases like this I tend to just have the first usage link, others do it differently. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/18646#discussion_r1553379147