On Fri, 11 Jul 2025 15:31:53 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
>> Once https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8358769 is resolved,
>> JavaBaseCheckSince no longer needs to be problemlisted.
>
> Nizar Benalla has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
> merge
On Tue, 17 Jun 2025 15:22:24 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Once https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8358769 is resolved,
> JavaBaseCheckSince no longer needs to be problemlisted.
This pull request has now been integrated.
Changeset: bcd86d57
Author: Nizar Benalla
URL:
> Once https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8358769 is resolved,
> JavaBaseCheckSince no longer needs to be problemlisted.
Nizar Benalla has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains two commits:
- Merge branch 'm
On Tue, 3 Jun 2025 10:09:44 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Please review this patch to add a new test to check `@since` tags in the
> `jdk.editpad` module.
>
> TIA
This pull request has now been integrated.
Changeset: 7daf9813
Author:Nizar Benalla
URL:
https://git.ope
On Tue, 3 Jun 2025 10:09:44 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Please review this patch to add a new test to check `@since` tags in the
> `jdk.editpad` module.
>
> TIA
Thanks for the review Jaikiran. This passes on all platforms in our CI
-
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.
On Tue, 8 Jul 2025 05:18:31 GMT, Jaikiran Pai wrote:
>> Once https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8358769 is resolved,
>> JavaBaseCheckSince no longer needs to be problemlisted.
>
> Hello Nizar, if I understand correctly, this problem listing can be removed
> and the PR integrated once the merge
On Tue, 3 Jun 2025 10:09:44 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Please review this patch to add a new test to check `@since` tags in the
> `jdk.editpad` module.
>
> TIA
keep alive
-
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/25613#issuecomment-3023556036
On Tue, 17 Jun 2025 15:22:24 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Once https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8358769 is resolved,
> JavaBaseCheckSince no longer needs to be problemlisted.
Now that https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/25854 has been integrated, the
tests no longer need to be problem
On Tue, 17 Jun 2025 23:34:52 GMT, Alisen Chung wrote:
>> This issue is responsible for updating the translations of all the
>> localize(able) resources in the JDK since the previous L10n drop.
>
> Alisen Chung has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the las
Once [8346295](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8346295) is resolved,
JavaBaseCheckSince no longer needs to be problemlisted.
-
Depends on: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/25854
Commit messages:
- this test no longer needs to be problem listed
Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/
On Fri, 2 May 2025 14:48:01 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Get JDK 26 underway.
This pull request has now been integrated.
Changeset: af87035b
Author: Nizar Benalla
Committer: Jesper Wilhelmsson
URL:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/commit/af87035b713f8bfe05a007a4d4670cefc6a6aaf2
St
> Get JDK 26 underway.
Nizar Benalla has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the last revision:
fix typo
-
Changes:
- all: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/25008/files
- new: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/25008/files/09df3b66..9929d
> Get JDK 26 underway.
Nizar Benalla has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 22 commits:
- use a different bug ID to problemlist `kevinrushforth `
- Merge branch 'master' into jdk.8355746
- Merge branch
On Wed, 4 Jun 2025 20:44:12 GMT, Kevin Rushforth wrote:
>> Nizar Benalla has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
>> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 20 commits:
>>
>> - Merge branch 'master' into jdk.8355746
&g
On Tue, 3 Jun 2025 10:09:44 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Please review this patch to add a new test to check `@since` tags in the
> `jdk.editpad` module.
>
> TIA
I realize there are no classfiles in `jdk.editpad` but the test can also check
the `@since` information in the `modu
> Get JDK 26 underway.
Nizar Benalla has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 20 commits:
- Merge branch 'master' into jdk.8355746
- Problemlist JavaBaseCheckSince
- Revert "feedback: never bump ASM ve
On Mon, 2 Jun 2025 14:46:15 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
>> Get JDK 26 underway.
>
> Nizar Benalla has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 18 commits:
>
> - Revert "feedback: never bump ASM versio
Please review this patch to add a new test to check `@since` tags in the
`jdk.editpad` module.
TIA
-
Commit messages:
- add new `@since` test
Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/25613/files
Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=25613&range=00
Issue: https://bu
On Mon, 2 Jun 2025 14:46:15 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
>> Get JDK 26 underway.
>
> Nizar Benalla has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 18 commits:
>
> - Revert "feedback: never bump ASM versio
On Mon, 2 Jun 2025 14:46:15 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
>> Get JDK 26 underway.
>
> Nizar Benalla has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
> merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 18 commits:
>
> - Revert "feedback: never bump ASM versio
> Get JDK 26 underway.
Nizar Benalla has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 18 commits:
- Revert "feedback: never bump ASM version"
This reverts commit 7f6e8a8cb305183bc2090dce1f89dc456d181cb5.
-
> Get JDK 26 underway.
Nizar Benalla has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 16 commits:
- Merge branch 'master' into jdk.8355746
- Merge branch 'master' into jdk.8355746
- Update --release 25 symbol
On Thu, 8 May 2025 13:15:35 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
>> It is to accommodate the now longer list of --release values in the javac
>> help output,the addition of ", 26".
>>
>> Splitting the list of releases over two lines would be a better solution,
On Tue, 27 May 2025 09:35:51 GMT, Viktor Klang wrote:
> I had to tweak the language a bit to better reflect the intent of the text.
Thanks for doing this! There are no longer any links to private types in
`java.util.concurrent`
-
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/25462#
> Get JDK 26 underway.
Nizar Benalla has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 14 commits:
- Update --release 25 symbol information for JDK 25 build 24
The macOS/AArch64 build 24 was taken from https://jdk.java.net
On Fri, 23 May 2025 14:59:07 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
>> Please review this patch to fix some `javadoc` bugs in `java.base`.
>> Certain `@link` tags used to refer to private fields instead of public APIs.
>>
>> A couple of `@see` tags in the [serialization
>> p
On Sat, 17 May 2025 19:42:39 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Please review this patch to fix some `javadoc` bugs in `java.base`.
> Certain `@link` tags used to refer to private fields instead of public APIs.
>
> A couple of `@see` tags in the [serialization
> page](https://downloa
On Sat, 17 May 2025 17:21:01 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Please review this trivial patch to fix a javadoc bug.
>
> TIA
This pull request has now been integrated.
Changeset: b034710b
Author: Nizar Benalla
URL:
https://git.openjdk.org/j
On Sat, 17 May 2025 17:21:01 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Please review this trivial patch to fix a javadoc bug.
>
> TIA
Thanks for the review
-
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/25286#issuecomment-2907810545
lized-form.html#java.lang.invoke.MethodType)
> referred to private methods, I updated the javadoc in a way to not change
> the way it is displayed to users but also remove `@link` tags to non-included
> types.
>
> TIA
Nizar Benalla has updated the pull request incrementally with one add
lized-form.html#java.lang.invoke.MethodType)
> referred to private methods, I updated the javadoc in a way to not change
> the way it is displayed to users but also remove `@link` tags to non-included
> types.
>
> TIA
Nizar Benalla has updated the pull request incrementally with one add
On Mon, 19 May 2025 20:41:13 GMT, Joe Darcy wrote:
>> They are documented in [this
>> page](https://download.java.net/java/early_access/jdk25/docs/api/serialized-form.html#java.lang.invoke.MethodType)
>
> Okay -- if there is some link to the private serial-related methods even in a
> public jav
> Get JDK 26 underway.
Nizar Benalla has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains nine commits:
- Update --release 25 symbol information for JDK 25 build 23
The macOS/AArch64 build 23 was taken from https://jdk.java.net
On Sun, 18 May 2025 02:18:24 GMT, Chen Liang wrote:
>> Please review this patch to fix some `javadoc` bugs in `java.base`.
>> Certain `@link` tags used to refer to private fields instead of public APIs.
>>
>> A couple of `@see` tags in the [serialization
>> page](https://download.java.net/java/
Please review this patch to fix some `javadoc` bugs in `java.base`.
Certain `@link` tags used to refer to private fields instead of public APIs.
A couple of `@see` tags in the [serialization
page](https://download.java.net/java/early_access/jdk25/docs/api/serialized-form.html#java.lang.invoke.Met
Please review this trivial patch to fix a javadoc bug.
TIA
-
Commit messages:
- use PseudoColumnUsage#name() instead
- fix incorrect `@link` tags
Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/25286/files
Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=25286&range=00
Issue: https
On Sat, 10 May 2025 14:32:10 GMT, Chen Liang wrote:
>>> I have asked @nizarbenalla in offline communications for a list of failing
>>> hotspot tests. I aim to update them on a case-by-case basis, to determine
>>> if the compile arguments should provide a `--release ` argument or
>>> migrate cl
On Fri, 9 May 2025 16:15:11 GMT, Joe Darcy wrote:
>> Fix javadoc tags.
>
> Joe Darcy has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
> commit since the last revision:
>
> Respond to review feedback.
Looks good!
-
Marked as reviewed by nbenalla (Committer).
PR Re
On Thu, 8 May 2025 21:07:16 GMT, Joe Darcy wrote:
> Fix javadoc tags.
I just noticed there are a couple more javadoc tags that need to be fixed in
this class, I still see two more warnings. I should have included these in the
JBS issue when filling it.
src/java.base/share/classes/java/math/B
On Thu, 8 May 2025 21:07:16 GMT, Joe Darcy wrote:
> Fix javadoc tags.
I think this looks good.
-
Marked as reviewed by nbenalla (Committer).
PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/25131#pullrequestreview-2826639744
On Fri, 2 May 2025 16:42:04 GMT, Joe Darcy wrote:
>> test/langtools/tools/javac/options/HelpOutputColumnWidthTest.java line 50:
>>
>>> 48: public class HelpOutputColumnWidthTest extends TestRunner {
>>> 49:
>>> 50: public static final int MAX_COLUMNS = 84;
>>
>> What is this for?
>
> It is
> Get JDK 26 underway.
Nizar Benalla has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains seven commits:
- Update release date
- Update --release 25 symbol information for JDK 25 build 21
The macOS/AArch64 build 21 was taken f
On Fri, 2 May 2025 14:48:01 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Get JDK 26 underway.
This initial commit of the PR intentionally excludes the creation of the new
symbol files so that the fundamental code aspects of the update are easier to
see.
-
PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/
Get JDK 26 underway.
-
Commit messages:
- Update copyright years
- Update --release 25 symbol information for JDK 24 build 20
- initial commit start-of-JDK-26
Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/25008/files
Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=jdk&pr=25008&range=00
On Tue, 18 Feb 2025 23:06:42 GMT, Ian Myers wrote:
>> make/common/Modules.gmk line 95:
>>
>>> 93: SPEC_SUBDIRS += share/specs
>>> 94:
>>> 95: MAN_SUBDIRS += share/man windows/man
>>
>> Hm, normally I'd say you should use `$(TARGET_OS)/man`, but we typically
>> generate docs for all platforms
On Fri, 24 Jan 2025 10:58:24 GMT, Hannes Wallnöfer wrote:
>> Please review a doc-only change to mostly add missing `@serial` javadoc
>> tags. This is a sub-task of [JDK-8286931] to allow us to re-enable the
>> javadoc `-serialwarn` option in the JDK doc build, which has been disabled
>> since
On Thu, 30 Jan 2025 10:42:43 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This pull request contains a backport of commit
> [22069ff4](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/22069ff42b7e5c3058415ef9b6e0b50b9d2c16ef)
> from the [openjdk/jdk](https://git.openjdk.org/jdk) repository.
On Thu, 30 Jan 2025 10:42:43 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This pull request contains a backport of commit
> [22069ff4](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/22069ff42b7e5c3058415ef9b6e0b50b9d2c16ef)
> from the [openjdk/jdk](https://git.openjdk.org/jdk) repository.
Hi all,
This pull request contains a backport of commit
[22069ff4](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/22069ff42b7e5c3058415ef9b6e0b50b9d2c16ef)
from the [openjdk/jdk](https://git.openjdk.org/jdk) repository.
The commit being backported was authored by Nizar Benalla on 30 Jan 2025 and
was
On Wed, 29 Jan 2025 16:03:38 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Two groups of broken links appeared in the latest JDK docs, broken links to
> man pages and broken ietf links.
>
> - The windows tools markdown files were not being converted to HTML because
> they were placed under `wind
On Wed, 29 Jan 2025 16:03:38 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Two groups of broken links appeared in the latest JDK docs, broken links to
> man pages and broken ietf links.
>
> - The windows tools markdown files were not being converted to HTML because
> they were placed under `wind
Two groups of broken links appeared in the latest JDK docs, broken links to man
pages and broken ietf links.
- The windows tools markdown files were not being converted to HTML because
they were placed under `windows/man` rather than `share/man`, I've updated
`Modules.gmk` to pick up their loca
On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 18:55:10 GMT, Joe Wang wrote:
> Fix broken links in java.xml:
>
> Catalog: contacted Oasis. The standard page
> (https://www.oasis-open.org/standard/xmlcatalogs/) now links to the PDF
> version. That is what I'm using now, replacing the html pages. Not ideal, but
> at leas
On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 10:21:34 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This pull request contains a backport of commit
> [054c644e](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/054c644ea6ea38e54abc81e231977106d04bb69e)
> from the [openjdk/jdk](https://git.openjdk.org/jdk) repository.
Hi all,
This pull request contains a backport of commit
[054c644e](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/054c644ea6ea38e54abc81e231977106d04bb69e)
from the [openjdk/jdk](https://git.openjdk.org/jdk) repository.
The commit being backported was authored by Nizar Benalla on 20 Dec 2024 and
was
On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 10:21:17 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This pull request contains a backport of commit
> [2a68f741](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/2a68f741884e73c9ed8e5222e57f5ecb088b3cf7)
> from the [openjdk/jdk](https://git.openjdk.org/jdk) repository.
On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 10:21:17 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> This pull request contains a backport of commit
> [2a68f741](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/2a68f741884e73c9ed8e5222e57f5ecb088b3cf7)
> from the [openjdk/jdk](https://git.openjdk.org/jdk) repository.
Hi all,
This pull request contains a backport of commit
[2a68f741](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/2a68f741884e73c9ed8e5222e57f5ecb088b3cf7)
from the [openjdk/jdk](https://git.openjdk.org/jdk) repository.
The commit being backported was authored by Nizar Benalla on 20 Dec 2024 and
was
On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 16:48:33 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Please review this doc-only patch to fix an issue that causes the
> cmp-baseline build to fail.
>
> The snippet in `LabelTrget.java` showed a highly rare non deterministism in
> javadoc snippet generation, which will be f
On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 16:48:27 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Please review this doc-only patch to avoid some unwanted failures in our HTML
> checks.
>
> Javadoc wraps everything under `@param` in a ``, so having an `h2` tag
> there trips some of our tests that use html validators
On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 17:26:50 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
>> Please review this doc-only patch to avoid some unwanted failures in our
>> HTML checks.
>>
>> Javadoc wraps everything under `@param` in a ``, so having an `h2` tag
>> there trips some of our tests that
On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 16:48:33 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Please review this doc-only patch to fix an issue that causes the
> cmp-baseline build to fail.
>
> The snippet in `LabelTrget.java` showed a highly rare non deterministism in
> javadoc snippet generation, which will be f
On Thu, 19 Dec 2024 17:26:50 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
>> Please review this doc-only patch to avoid some unwanted failures in our
>> HTML checks.
>>
>> Javadoc wraps everything under `@param` in a ``, so having an `h2` tag
>> there trips some of our tests that
shouldn't have an `` inside of a span.
>
> This patch moves the text about "Value-based classes and identity operations"
> above the `@param` tag, it will now be rendered at the bottom of the class
> documentation.
>
> This will need to be backported to JDK 24.
&g
Please review this doc-only patch to avoid some unwanted failures in our HTML
checks.
Javadoc wraps everything under `@param` in a ``, so having an `h2` tag
there trips some of our tests that use html validators (html-tidy and some
other tests). I believe you shouldn't have an `` inside of a s
Please review this doc-only patch to fix an issue that causes the cmp-baseline
build to fail.
The snippet in `LabelTrget.java` showed a highly rare non deterministism in
javadoc snippet generation, which will be fixed in
[JDK-8346659](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8346659), but we can fix
On Fri, 8 Nov 2024 15:19:34 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Can I please get a review for this PR that add tests to verify the value of
> `@since` tags to the Tools area modules. The test is described in this
> [email](https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/jdk-dev/2024-October/009474.html)
On Fri, 29 Nov 2024 18:53:52 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
>> Can I please get a review for this PR that add tests to verify the value of
>> `@since` tags to the Tools area modules. The test is described in this
>> [email](https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/jdk-dev/2024-O
ing. (JFR used to be a
> commercial feature and this requires special handling to be added for it in
> the test)
>
> TIA
Nizar Benalla has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the last revision:
Revert "add a missing \@
On Fri, 29 Nov 2024 12:20:02 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
>> Can I please get a review for this PR that add tests to verify the value of
>> `@since` tags to the Tools area modules. The test is described in this
>> [email](https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/jdk-dev/2024-O
ing. (JFR used to be a
> commercial feature and this requires special handling to be added for it in
> the test)
>
> TIA
Nizar Benalla has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the last revision:
add a missing \@since tag to Record
On Fri, 15 Nov 2024 11:53:00 GMT, Adam Sotona wrote:
>> Class-File API is leaving preview.
>> This is a removal of all `@PreviewFeature` annotations from Class-File API.
>> It also bumps all `@since` tags and removes
>> `jdk.internal.javac.PreviewFeature.Feature.CLASSFILE_API`.
>>
>> Please rev
On Fri, 29 Nov 2024 11:08:57 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
>> test/jdk/tools/sincechecker/modules/jdk.jlink/JdkJlinkCheckSince.java line
>> 29:
>>
>>> 27: * @summary Test for `@since` in jdk.jlink module
>>> 28: * @library /test/lib /test/jdk/tools/sincecheck
ing. (JFR used to be a
> commercial feature and this requires special handling to be added for it in
> the test)
>
> TIA
Nizar Benalla has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a
merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes
brought in by
On Fri, 29 Nov 2024 11:00:15 GMT, Christian Stein wrote:
>> Nizar Benalla has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
>> commit since the last revision:
>>
>> Add backticks, as they are necessary. Otherwise the `@since` is treated as
>>
On Thu, 28 Nov 2024 11:33:43 GMT, Jonathan Lampérth wrote:
> This PR includes a suggested change in behaviour of `javap -l` without `-v`
> or `-c`.
> Previously it was possible to print `LineNumberTable` and
> `LocalVariableTable` without disassembled code output. This didn't make much
> sense
On Mon, 18 Nov 2024 17:06:03 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Can I get a review for this test only change to the Since Checker?
>
> I drop the distinction between classes and interfaces when generating ids and
> use a generic name "class" to describe both, as to not consid
On Mon, 18 Nov 2024 17:06:03 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Can I get a review for this test only change to the Since Checker?
>
> I drop the distinction between classes and interfaces when generating ids and
> use a generic name "class" to describe both, as to not consid
Can I get a review for this test only change to the Since Checker?
I drop the distinction between classes and interfaces when generating ids and
use a generic name "class" to describe both, as to not consider classes that
get converted to interfaces (and vice versa) as new API (Something that ma
ing. (JFR used to be a
> commercial feature and this requires special handling to be added for it in
> the test)
>
> TIA
Nizar Benalla has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional
commit since the last revision:
Add backticks, as they are necessary. Otherwise
Can I please get a review for this PR that add tests to verify the value of
`@since` tags to the Tools area modules. The test is described in this
[email](https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/jdk-dev/2024-October/009474.html).
The benefit from this is helping API authors and reviewer validate the
On Wed, 16 Oct 2024 16:23:41 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Can I get a review for this patch that adds `@since` checker tests to the
> following modules: java.compiler, jdk.compiler, jdk.javadoc and jdk.jdeps.
> The initial test for `java.base` has been integrated in
> [JDK-83
On Fri, 1 Nov 2024 17:19:00 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Can I get a review for this patch that brings the last changes to fix broken
> anchors in the source code.
>
> The links updated in this patch can be grouped into 3 sections, they were
> minor so I grouped them into one P
On Fri, 1 Nov 2024 17:19:00 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> Can I get a review for this patch that brings the last changes to fix broken
> anchors in the source code.
>
> The links updated in this patch can be grouped into 3 sections, they were
> minor so I grouped them into one P
ttps://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/jdk-dev/2024-June/009160.html)]
> [[2](https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/jdk-dev/2024-October/009474.html)] in
> `jdk-dev` describing how the tests work and how to run them.
>
> TIA
Nizar Benalla has updated the pull request incrementally with on
ttps://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/jdk-dev/2024-June/009160.html)]
> [[2](https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/jdk-dev/2024-October/009474.html)] in
> `jdk-dev` describing how the tests work and how to run them.
>
> TIA
Nizar Benalla has updated the pull request incrementally with one
ttps://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/jdk-dev/2024-June/009160.html)]
> [[2](https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/jdk-dev/2024-October/009474.html)] in
> `jdk-dev` describing how the tests work and how to run them.
>
> TIA
Nizar Benalla has updated the pull request incrementally with one ad
Can I get a review for this patch that brings the last changes to fix broken
anchors in the source code.
The links updated in this patch can be grouped into 3 sections, they were minor
so I grouped them into one PR.
1- Move some references from the old `foreign/package-summary.html#restricted`
ttps://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/jdk-dev/2024-June/009160.html)]
> [[2](https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/jdk-dev/2024-October/009474.html)] in
> `jdk-dev` describing how the tests work and how to run them.
>
> TIA
Nizar Benalla has updated the pull request incrementally with one
On Fri, 1 Nov 2024 15:51:10 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
>> Can I get a review for this patch that adds `@since` checker tests to the
>> following modules: java.compiler, jdk.compiler, jdk.javadoc and jdk.jdeps.
>> The initial test for `java.base` has been integrated in
>
ttps://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/jdk-dev/2024-June/009160.html)]
> [[2](https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/jdk-dev/2024-October/009474.html)] in
> `jdk-dev` describing how the tests work and how to run them.
>
> TIA
Nizar Benalla has updated the pull request with a new target bas
On Fri, 1 Nov 2024 15:36:59 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
>> test/jdk/tools/sincechecker/jdk_compiler/CheckSince_jdkCompiler.java line 27:
>>
>>> 25: * @test
>>> 26: * @bug 8341399
>>> 27: * @summary Test for `@since` for java.base module
>>
>>
On Fri, 1 Nov 2024 15:28:13 GMT, Chen Liang wrote:
>> Can I get a review for this patch that adds `@since` checker tests to the
>> following modules: java.compiler, jdk.compiler, jdk.javadoc and jdk.jdeps.
>> The initial test for `java.base` has been integrated in
>> [JDK-8331051](https://bugs
Can I get a review for this patch that adds `@since` checker tests to the
following modules: java.compiler, jdk.compiler, jdk.javadoc and jdk.jdeps. The
initial test for `java.base` has been integrated in
[JDK-8331051](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8331051).
The jtreg comments are almost
On Wed, 24 Apr 2024 14:10:29 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
> This checker checks the values of the `@since` tag found in the documentation
> comment for an element against the release in which the element first
> appeared.
>
> Real since value of an API element is computed as the
On Wed, 2 Oct 2024 14:03:59 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
>> This checker checks the values of the `@since` tag found in the
>> documentation comment for an element against the release in which the
>> element first appeared.
>>
>> Real since value of an API ele
On Wed, 2 Oct 2024 14:03:59 GMT, Nizar Benalla wrote:
>> This checker checks the values of the `@since` tag found in the
>> documentation comment for an element against the release in which the
>> element first appeared.
>>
>> Real since value of an API ele
> historical data built into `javac` which only goes back that far
>
> The intial comment at the beginning of `SinceChecker.java` holds more
> information into the program.
>
> I already have filed issues and fixed some wrong tags like in #18640, #18032,
> #18030, #18055, #18373,
On Thu, 26 Sep 2024 08:16:50 GMT, Adam Sotona wrote:
>> Class-File API is leaving preview.
>> This is a removal of all `@PreviewFeature` annotations from Class-File API.
>> It also bumps all `@since` tags and removes
>> `jdk.internal.javac.PreviewFeature.Feature.CLASSFILE_API`.
>>
>> Please rev
> historical data built into `javac` which only goes back that far
>
> The intial comment at the beginning of `SinceChecker.java` holds more
> information into the program.
>
> I already have filed issues and fixed some wrong tags like in #18640, #18032,
> #18030, #18055, #18373,
1 - 100 of 225 matches
Mail list logo
