Re: RFR: JDK-8253735: Cleanup SearchIndexItem API [v2]

2020-10-06 Thread Jonathan Gibbons
> This pull-request is for a substantial refactoring and cleanup of the code > to build the static index pages and the files for the interactive search > > There is no significant change in functionality, and all tests continue to > pass without change. > > ## Improvements > > * `SearchIndexItem

Re: RFR: JDK-8253735: Cleanup SearchIndexItem API

2020-10-06 Thread Jonathan Gibbons
On Tue, 6 Oct 2020 14:52:33 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons wrote: >> src/jdk.javadoc/share/classes/jdk/javadoc/internal/doclets/formats/html/markup/Links.java >> line 289: >> >>> 287: String a = isProperty >>> 288: ? executableElement.getSimpleName().toString() >>> 289:

Re: RFR: JDK-8253735: Cleanup SearchIndexItem API

2020-10-06 Thread Jonathan Gibbons
On Tue, 6 Oct 2020 11:53:39 GMT, Hannes Wallnöfer wrote: >> This pull-request is for a substantial refactoring and cleanup of the code >> to build the static index pages and the files for the interactive search >> >> There is no significant change in functionality, and all tests continue to >> p

Re: RFR: JDK-8253735: Cleanup SearchIndexItem API

2020-10-06 Thread Jonathan Gibbons
On Tue, 6 Oct 2020 11:05:35 GMT, Hannes Wallnöfer wrote: >> This pull-request is for a substantial refactoring and cleanup of the code >> to build the static index pages and the files for the interactive search >> >> There is no significant change in functionality, and all tests continue to >> p

Re: RFR: JDK-8253735: Cleanup SearchIndexItem API

2020-10-06 Thread Jonathan Gibbons
On 10/6/20 5:30 AM, Hannes Wallnöfer wrote: On Mon, 5 Oct 2020 18:48:37 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons wrote: This pull-request is for a substantial refactoring and cleanup of the code to build the static index pages and the files for the interactive search There is no significant change in function

Re: RFR: JDK-8253735: Cleanup SearchIndexItem API

2020-10-06 Thread Hannes Wallnöfer
On Mon, 5 Oct 2020 18:48:37 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons wrote: >> This pull-request is for a substantial refactoring and cleanup of the code >> to build the static index pages and the files for the interactive search >> >> There is no significant change in functionality, and all tests continue to >> p

Re: RFR: JDK-8253735: Cleanup SearchIndexItem API

2020-10-06 Thread Hannes Wallnöfer
On Sun, 4 Oct 2020 22:06:02 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons wrote: > This pull-request is for a substantial refactoring and cleanup of the code > to build the static index pages and the files for the interactive search > > There is no significant change in functionality, and all tests continue to > pass w

Re: RFR: JDK-8253735: Cleanup SearchIndexItem API

2020-10-05 Thread Jonathan Gibbons
On Sun, 4 Oct 2020 22:06:02 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons wrote: > This pull-request is for a substantial refactoring and cleanup of the code > to build the static index pages and the files for the interactive search > > There is no significant change in functionality, and all tests continue to > pass w

Re: RFR: JDK-8253735: Cleanup SearchIndexItem API

2020-10-05 Thread Jonathan Gibbons
On Sun, 4 Oct 2020 22:06:02 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons wrote: > This pull-request is for a substantial refactoring and cleanup of the code > to build the static index pages and the files for the interactive search > > There is no significant change in functionality, and all tests continue to > pass w

Re: RFR: JDK-8253735: Cleanup SearchIndexItem API

2020-10-05 Thread Jonathan Gibbons
On Mon, 5 Oct 2020 18:26:14 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons wrote: >> This pull-request is for a substantial refactoring and cleanup of the code >> to build the static index pages and the files for the interactive search >> >> There is no significant change in functionality, and all tests continue to >> p

Re: RFR: JDK-8253735: Cleanup SearchIndexItem API

2020-10-05 Thread Jonathan Gibbons
On Sun, 4 Oct 2020 22:06:02 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons wrote: > This pull-request is for a substantial refactoring and cleanup of the code > to build the static index pages and the files for the interactive search > > There is no significant change in functionality, and all tests continue to > pass w