JDK-8310453: Update javadoc of java.lang.Object #14567

jddarcy · 2023-06-20T17:13:26Z

I had occasion to read over the javadoc sources in java.lang.Object recently and noticed a few items that could be updated.

There are some new or expanded API notes referring to methods in java.util.Objects. I added these references as apiNote items rather than, say, @see tags since @see tag changes would propagate into classes that overrode the methods in questions.

Changing toString to use an inline @return tag has the consequence of omitting a trailing period, "." in the "Returns" section of its javadoc. This also omits a trailing period in subclasses that use the @return statement of Object.toString in their own toString method. Likewise for hashCode.

Progress

Change must be properly reviewed (1 review required, with at least 1 Reviewer)
Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
Commit message must refer to an issue

Issue

JDK-8310453: Update javadoc of java.lang.Object (Enhancement - P4)

Reviewers

Roger Riggs (@RogerRiggs - Reviewer)
Alan Bateman (@AlanBateman - Reviewer)

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/14567/head:pull/14567
$ git checkout pull/14567

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/14567
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/14567/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 14567

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 14567

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/14567.diff

Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

bridgekeeper · 2023-06-20T17:14:18Z

👋 Welcome back darcy! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into master will be added to the body of your pull request. There are additional pull request commands available for use with this pull request.

openjdk · 2023-06-20T17:15:20Z

@jddarcy The following label will be automatically applied to this pull request:

core-libs

When this pull request is ready to be reviewed, an "RFR" email will be sent to the corresponding mailing list. If you would like to change these labels, use the /label pull request command.

mlbridge · 2023-06-20T17:19:19Z

Webrevs

00: Full (07b8f9b3)

RogerRiggs

Looks good.

openjdk · 2023-06-20T17:44:44Z

@jddarcy This change now passes all automated pre-integration checks.

ℹ️ This project also has non-automated pre-integration requirements. Please see the file CONTRIBUTING.md for details.

After integration, the commit message for the final commit will be:

8310453: Update javadoc of java.lang.Object

Reviewed-by: rriggs, alanb

You can use pull request commands such as /summary, /contributor and /issue to adjust it as needed.

At the time when this comment was updated there had been 44 new commits pushed to the master branch:

370b8b2: 8310618: Test serviceability/sa/ClhsdbDumpclass.java fails after 8242152: 'StackMapTable:' missing from stdout/stderr
5a30fb6: 8310591: Missing @since tags in java.lang.foreign
8976ebf: 8310561: JFR: Unify decodeDescriptors(String, String)
7da3f19: 8310549: avoid potential leaks in KeystoreImpl.m related to JNU_CHECK_EXCEPTION early returns
8e04702: 8242152: SA does not include StackMapTables when dumping .class files
3bc475e: 8309909: remove test nsk.jvmti test objmonusage006 from ProblemList-Virtual.txt
3661cde: 8309853: StructuredTaskScope.join description improvements
ac44ef1: 8310586: ProblemList java/lang/ScopedValue/StressStackOverflow.java#default with virtual threads on linux-all
3be50da: 8310512: Cleanup indentation in jfc files
f286e5a: 8310575: no @since for StandardDoclet
... and 34 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/b2e86aef65f4d579896b6db83aaad408b6c580d4...master

As there are no conflicts, your changes will automatically be rebased on top of these commits when integrating. If you prefer to avoid this automatic rebasing, please check the documentation for the /integrate command for further details.

➡️ To integrate this PR with the above commit message to the master branch, type /integrate in a new comment.

pavelrappo · 2023-06-21T11:39:43Z

src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/Object.java

-     * @return  a string representation of the object.
+     * }
+     * The {@link java.util.Objects#toIdentityString(Object)
+     * Objects.toIdentityString} method returns the string for an


That last sentence doesn't feel like it needs to be part of @implSpec, although there's definitely a connection.

That is, a clear connection to what's being described by that @implSpec.

This method has an existing apiNote and implSpec. I suspect Joe meant to add this sentence to the apiNote, not the implSpec.

I did mean to add the cross-reference to Objects.toIdentityString to the implSpec section since earlier in the implSpec section the expression that is the basis for Objects.toIdentityString is listed.

pavelrappo · 2023-06-21T11:47:25Z

src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/Object.java

-     * @return  a string representation of the object.
+     * }
+     * The {@link java.util.Objects#toIdentityString(Object)
+     * Objects.toIdentityString} method returns the string for an


Separately, is it just me or this sentence could be rephrased to not read like toIdentityString(Object) accepts an object equal to the string (that would ...)?

pavelrappo · 2023-06-21T11:55:13Z

While it's out of scope of this PR, I note that we could also use the inline variant of @return in those methods of Objects that the Object refers to: hash(Object), hashCode(Object...), and equals(Object, Object). In fact, I think they are crying for it.

liach · 2023-06-21T13:58:53Z

src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/Object.java

     * method whenever this method is overridden, so as to maintain the
     * general contract for the {@code hashCode} method, which states
     * that equal objects must have equal hash codes.
+     * <p>The two-argument {@link java.util.Objects#equals(Object,


I recommend a blank line before to make the paragraph break more obvious.

pavelrappo · 2023-06-22T10:27:18Z

While it's out of scope of this PR, I note that we could also use the inline variant of @return in those methods of Objects that the Object refers to: hash(Object), hashCode(Object...), and equals(Object, Object). In fact, I think they are crying for it.

@jddarcy, I see you have since published a separate PR that includes those methods: #14608; thanks!

jddarcy · 2023-06-22T16:36:50Z

/integrate

openjdk · 2023-06-22T16:38:40Z

Going to push as commit 0e4fde3.
Since your change was applied there have been 45 commits pushed to the master branch:

230bcb7: 8309685: Fix -Wconversion warnings in assembler and register code
370b8b2: 8310618: Test serviceability/sa/ClhsdbDumpclass.java fails after 8242152: 'StackMapTable:' missing from stdout/stderr
5a30fb6: 8310591: Missing @since tags in java.lang.foreign
8976ebf: 8310561: JFR: Unify decodeDescriptors(String, String)
7da3f19: 8310549: avoid potential leaks in KeystoreImpl.m related to JNU_CHECK_EXCEPTION early returns
8e04702: 8242152: SA does not include StackMapTables when dumping .class files
3bc475e: 8309909: remove test nsk.jvmti test objmonusage006 from ProblemList-Virtual.txt
3661cde: 8309853: StructuredTaskScope.join description improvements
ac44ef1: 8310586: ProblemList java/lang/ScopedValue/StressStackOverflow.java#default with virtual threads on linux-all
3be50da: 8310512: Cleanup indentation in jfc files
... and 35 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/b2e86aef65f4d579896b6db83aaad408b6c580d4...master

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

openjdk · 2023-06-22T16:38:46Z

@jddarcy Pushed as commit 0e4fde3.

💡 You may see a message that your pull request was closed with unmerged commits. This can be safely ignored.

JDK-8310453: Update javadoc of java.lang.Object

07b8f9b

openjdk bot added the rfr Pull request is ready for review label Jun 20, 2023

openjdk bot added the core-libs core-libs-dev@openjdk.org label Jun 20, 2023

RogerRiggs approved these changes Jun 20, 2023

View reviewed changes

openjdk bot added the ready Pull request is ready to be integrated label Jun 20, 2023

pavelrappo reviewed Jun 21, 2023

View reviewed changes

liach reviewed Jun 21, 2023

View reviewed changes

AlanBateman approved these changes Jun 22, 2023

View reviewed changes

openjdk bot added the integrated Pull request has been integrated label Jun 22, 2023

openjdk bot closed this Jun 22, 2023

openjdk bot removed ready Pull request is ready to be integrated rfr Pull request is ready for review labels Jun 22, 2023

jddarcy deleted the JDK-8310453 branch October 17, 2024 16:54

JDK-8310453: Update javadoc of java.lang.Object #14567

JDK-8310453: Update javadoc of java.lang.Object #14567

Uh oh!

Conversation

jddarcy commented Jun 20, 2023 • edited by openjdk bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Progress

Issue

Reviewers

Reviewing

Webrev

Uh oh!

bridgekeeper bot commented Jun 20, 2023

Uh oh!

openjdk bot commented Jun 20, 2023

Uh oh!

mlbridge bot commented Jun 20, 2023

Webrevs

Uh oh!

RogerRiggs left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

openjdk bot commented Jun 20, 2023 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

pavelrappo Jun 21, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

pavelrappo Jun 21, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

AlanBateman Jun 21, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

jddarcy Jun 21, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

AlanBateman Jun 22, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

pavelrappo Jun 21, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

pavelrappo commented Jun 21, 2023

Uh oh!

liach Jun 21, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

pavelrappo commented Jun 22, 2023

Uh oh!

jddarcy commented Jun 22, 2023

Uh oh!

openjdk bot commented Jun 22, 2023

Uh oh!

openjdk bot commented Jun 22, 2023

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants

jddarcy commented Jun 20, 2023 •

edited by openjdk bot

Loading

openjdk bot commented Jun 20, 2023 •

edited

Loading