8017325, 8017326: Cleanup of javadoc <code> tag

Jason Uh jason.uh at oracle.com
Tue Jun 25 13:23:08 PDT 2013


Joe,

Here are the updated webrevs:

- java.security.cert:
      http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~juh/8017325/webrev.02/
- java.security.spec:
      http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~juh/8017326/webrev.01/

I have converted "<tt>...</tt>" to "{@code ...}" and have updated the 
copyright dates.

I've attached diffs of the patches to show what has been updated in 
these new webrevs. There is a little extra noise in them due to the 
change in the timestamps.

Thanks,
Jason


On 06/24/2013 06:11 PM, Joseph Darcy wrote:
> On 6/24/2013 3:00 PM, Jason Uh wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 6/24/13 10:51 AM, Joe Darcy wrote:
>>> Hi Jason,
>>>
>>> On 6/21/2013 6:58 PM, Jason Uh wrote:
>>>> After learning that javadoc is now capable of properly formatting the
>>>> "<pre>{@code ...}</pre>" construct, I have updated the changeset for
>>>> java.security.cert. Please review instead:
>>>>
>>>> Webrevs --
>>>> - java.security.cert (updated):
>>>>     http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~juh/8017325/webrev.01/
>>>> - java.security.spec (no change):
>>>>     http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~juh/8017326/webrev.00/
>>>
>>> I've looked over both patches and they look fine.
>>>
>>> However, as a follow-up, please also expand the conversion to include
>>> mapping "<tt>foo</tt>" => "{@code foo}".
>>
>> Thanks. I can make those changes, but are you suggesting that I add
>> them to this changeset or that I do that separately?
>
> For review purposes, I'd like to see them separately in some fashion,
> even if it was produced by diffing the patch files.
>
>>
>>>>
>>>> Note that this change does visibly change the generated javadoc, as
>>>> reported by specdiff. In particular, the change to <pre>{@code
>>>> ...}</pre> in the javadoc for the
>>>> X509Extension.getNonCriticalExtensionOIDs() method now allows the
>>>> generated HTML to correctly display the line:
>>>>
>>>>    Set<String> nonCritSet = badCert.getNonCriticalExtensionOIDs();
>>>>
>>>> which was previously (incorrectly) displayed as
>>>>
>>>>    Set nonCritSet = badCert.getNonCriticalExtensionOIDs();
>>>>
>>>> when the text "<String>" was still enclosed within
>>>> "<pre><code>...</code></pre>".
>>>
>>> Running specdiff is a good double-check in this situation.
>>>
>>> Should the scripts you are using here to placed somewhere in the JDK
>>> repo or in the code tools project?
>>
>> I'm not sure that I follow. Are you requesting that I include
>> somewhere in the repo the line of Perl that I ran? (It was used to
>> make most, but not all of these changes.) If so, where would be the
>> most appropriate place to add that?
>
> If it is a one-liner, it could be included in the summary line of the
> commit message or as a comment in the bug. If it is more substantive
> (since we will be rolling out this change across the JDK libraries),
> having the command in a known-location would be helpful. Especially, if
> a check for this pattern is built into future code-quality checks.
>
> -Joe
>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Jason
>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> -Joe
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Jason
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The files that have been updated
>>>>
>>>> On 6/21/13 5:47 PM, Jason Uh wrote:
>>>>> Joe, all,
>>>>>
>>>>> Could I please get a review of the following changes?
>>>>>
>>>>> These changesets convert the <code>...</code> javadoc tags to {@code
>>>>> ...} as part of an overall effort to clean up doclint warnings.
>>>>>
>>>>> Webrevs --
>>>>> - java.security.cert:
>>>>>      http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~juh/8017325/webrev.00/
>>>>> - java.security.spec:
>>>>>      http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~juh/8017326/webrev.00/
>>>>>
>>>>> specdiff reported no changes in the generated docs.
>>>>>
>>>>> More of these to come.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>> Jason
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: cert.01-to-02.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 41655 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/attachments/20130625/d2864d10/cert.01-to-02-0001.patch 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: spec.00-to-01.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 19076 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/security-dev/attachments/20130625/d2864d10/spec.00-to-01-0001.patch 


More information about the security-dev mailing list