On Tue, 29 Nov 2022 21:36:11 GMT, Kevin Rushforth <k...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> I think that we should refrain from making "structural" changes in this >> pass. Let's keep the warning on and deal with these later. > > I see that this change has been reverted. That's good. > > FWIW, I disagree with the original premise of removing it. The subclass > shouldn't have to know or care that the superclass method is empty or not. > > I looked through the current version, and no longer have any concerns about > this PR. I'll let others formally review. Although there are many ways to implement this kind of inheritance, I do think that what I did here was also a valid solution. The parent class was already `abstract` -- all I did was to make the `processEndElement` abstract instead of empty, forcing the subtypes to think about it and implement it. Calling `super` is then no longer allowed. I did not remove `super` because I knew it was empty, I removed it because it was now `abstract`. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/958
