RFR: 'Address reliance on default constructors in the Java 2D APIs'
philip.race at oracle.com
Mon Aug 17 19:23:24 UTC 2020
Neither of awt-dev or jdk-dev is the right list for this fix.
Please move the review to 2d-dev.
On 8/17/20, 4:50 AM, Lance Andersen wrote:
> Hi Daniel
>> On Aug 17, 2020, at 7:30 AM, Daniel Fuchs<daniel.fuchs at oracle.com> wrote:
>> 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.
> If the wording is being used elsewhere, then we have a precedent. We should probably discuss at some point do we want to revisit the wording throughout the JDK for consistency.
> Thank you for the follow up
>> best regards,
>> -- daniel
> Lance Andersen| Principal Member of Technical Staff | +1.781.442.2037
> Oracle Java Engineering
> 1 Network Drive
> Burlington, MA 01803
> Lance.Andersen at oracle.com
More information about the jdk-dev