[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       openjdk-2d-dev
Subject:    Re: [OpenJDK 2D-Dev] RFR: 8253322 : Update the specification in the newly added constructors
From:       Phil Race <prr () openjdk ! java ! net>
Date:       2020-09-23 23:24:49
Message-ID: _Pac9-OCb-L3zYjzB1WPcs_ugW5-ksqdbwnmLgTiaWk=.3e2d4212-65b4-4d15-98aa-8bb05bca3bda () github ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Wed, 23 Sep 2020 07:03:59 GMT, Sergey Bylokhov <serb@openjdk.org> wrote:

> Looks like different people use a different style for the new constructors, it will \
> be good to unify them. 
> The text "Constructor for subclasses to call." should be used in the protected \
> constructors in the abstract classes In all other cases the text "Constructs an \
> {@code ClassName}." should be used A period (full stop) to the end of all javadoc \
> comments, should be added if it is missing 
> I have started from https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8252721
> See
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8252908?focusedCommentId=14370006&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#comment-14370006
>  
> But since I already touched a bunch of classes, I decided to update some other \
> fixes as well. 
> This will update the changes for:
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8252721
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8252195
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8250858

Marked as reviewed by prr (Reviewer).

-------------

PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/315


[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]