RFR: 'Address reliance on default constructors in the Java 2D APIs'
daniel.fuchs at oracle.com
Mon Aug 17 11:30:34 UTC 2020
On 17/08/2020 12:16, Lance Andersen wrote:
> The description for almost all of the constructors indicate:
> Constructor for subclasses to call
> Is the above wording used elsewhere in the JDK? Not sure I like it, I might suggest a little wordsmithing
As far as I know that's what Joe Darcy used to document
public implicit constructors in abstract classes in
recent similar cleanup patches, see for instance here:
I wouldn't use that description if the class could be instantiated,
but if it's abstract then we have a precedent...
Not sure if there is already a different convention for that
in 2D/AWT code base though.
More information about the jdk-dev