Hi
I filed 2 bug reports for typos in java.base Javadoc:
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JI-9064752 with patch
diff --git
a/src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/invoke/package-info.java
b/src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/invoke/package-info.java
index 82600d4866..a0ad09b03e 100644
--- a/src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/invoke/package-info.java
+++ b/src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/invoke/package-info.java
@@ -31,7 +31,7 @@
* As described in the Java Virtual Machine Specification, certain
types in this package
* are given special treatment by the virtual machine:
* <ul>
- * <li>The classes {@link java.lang.invoke.MethodHandle MethodHandle}
+ * <li>The classes {@link java.lang.invoke.MethodHandle MethodHandle} and
* {@link java.lang.invoke.VarHandle VarHandle} contain
* <a href="MethodHandle.html#sigpoly">signature polymorphic methods</a>
* which can be linked regardless of their type descriptor.
@@ -190,7 +190,7 @@
* invoked with just the parameter types of static arguments, thereby
supporting a wider
* range of methods compatible with the static arguments (such as
methods that don't declare
* or require the lookup, name, and type meta-data parameters).
- * <p> For example, for dynamically-computed call site, a the first
argument
+ * <p> For example, for a dynamically-computed call site, the first
argument
* could be {@code Object} instead of {@code MethodHandles.Lookup},
and the return type
* could also be {@code Object} instead of {@code CallSite}.
* (Note that the types and number of the stacked arguments limit
and https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JI-9064753 with patch
diff --git
a/src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/concurrent/locks/ReentrantLock.java
b/src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/concurrent/locks/ReentrantLock.java
index 415e50e29c..be46131d3e 100644
---
a/src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/concurrent/locks/ReentrantLock.java
+++
b/src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/concurrent/locks/ReentrantLock.java
@@ -84,7 +84,7 @@ import jdk.internal.vm.annotation.ReservedStackAccess;
* try {
* // ... method body
* } finally {
- * lock.unlock()
+ * lock.unlock();
* }
* }
* }}</pre>
There's also a typo in a comment inside native code, but I didn't file a
bug report for it:
diff --git a/src/java.base/unix/native/libjava/ProcessImpl_md.c
b/src/java.base/unix/native/libjava/ProcessImpl_md.c
index 9c562a3d16..68aa1c457a 100644
--- a/src/java.base/unix/native/libjava/ProcessImpl_md.c
+++ b/src/java.base/unix/native/libjava/ProcessImpl_md.c
@@ -93,7 +93,7 @@
* grained control about how exactly the process fork is executed.
It is
* powerful, but Linux-specific.
*
- * Aside from these three possibilities there is a forth option:
posix_spawn(3).
+ * Aside from these three possibilities there is a fourth option:
posix_spawn(3).
* Where fork/vfork/clone all fork off the process and leave pre-exec
work and
* calling exec(2) to the user, posix_spawn(3) offers the user
fork+exec-like
* functionality in one package, similar to CreateProcess() on Windows.
Kind regards,
Anthony
