8000269: Cleanup javadoc warnings

David Holmes david.holmes at oracle.com
Mon Oct 1 07:20:23 UTC 2012

Hi Alan,

This one caught my eye:


This entire class seems to re-declare inherited methods from 
DatagramSocketImpl for no obvious reason and mess up the javadoc in the 
process. In many/most cases there is no need to redeclare the methods 
AFAICS. If there is some subtle reason then inheritance of the existing 
javadoc should suffice in the majority of cases.


On 30/09/2012 6:52 AM, Alan Bateman wrote:
> A small number of javadoc warnings have sneaked into the jdk8 builds
> lately. They are easily fixed but it's a good opportunity to try out
> Jon's doccheck tool [1], built on the DocTree API, and get a better
> workout. I decided to mostly focus on -Xmsgs:reference, which covers
> references like @param and @throws. I fixed a small number of html
> issues along the way but that was not my focus. The webrev, which fixes
> up most of the reference issues in roughly the core area, is here:
> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~alanb/8000269/webrev/index.html
> When I say "most" then I excluded j.u.c and java.lang.invoke.
> The reason that so many files are changed is because doccheck looks at
> private and package-private classes and methods that wouldn't normally
> be in the javadoc. Also, no foray into the *Permission classes is
> possible without fixing up at least a few formatting issues. Note that
> there is one non-javadoc change in this webrev; in java.net.Inet4Address
> I have removed a private static field that has not been used for several
> releases.
> The changes are trivial and easy to review. At it covers many areas then
> partial reviews are okay too.
> Thanks,
> Alan.
> [1]
> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/compiler-dev/2012-September/004800.html

More information about the core-libs-dev mailing list