JDK-8310267: Javadoc for Class#isPrimitive() is incorrect regarding Class objects for primitives #14574

jddarcy · 2023-06-21T00:00:54Z

Correct misstatement that the Class object for a primitive type can only be be access via fields like java.lang.Integer.TYPE.

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-8310267: Javadoc for Class#isPrimitive() is incorrect regarding Class objects for primitives (Bug - P4)

Reviewers

Pavel Rappo (@pavelrappo - Reviewer) ⚠️ Review applies to 9f4a5555

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/14574/head:pull/14574
$ git checkout pull/14574

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/14574
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/14574/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 14574

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 14574

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/14574.diff

Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

…lass objects for primitives

bridgekeeper · 2023-06-21T00:01:42Z

👋 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 · 2023-06-21T00:04:12Z

@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 · 2023-06-21T00:08:12Z

Webrevs

liach · 2023-06-21T00:13:24Z

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

@@ -812,14 +812,19 @@ public Void run() {
     *
     * <p> There are nine predefined {@code Class} objects to represent
     * the eight primitive types and void.  These are created by the Java
-     * Virtual Machine, and have the same names as the primitive types that
+     * Virtual Machine, and have the same {@linkplain #getName() names} as the primitive types that
     * they represent, namely {@code boolean}, {@code byte},
     * {@code char}, {@code short}, {@code int},
     * {@code long}, {@code float}, and {@code double}.


Should we add {@code void} to the list here, as this is one of the primitive type names?

Hmm. I'll consider that. The javadoc in java.lang.Class is inconsistent in the formatting of "void" as a type name, some instances are in code markup while others are not.

@liach please have a look at this intensive exchange between David Holmes (@dholmes-ora) and me: #6213 (comment) That exchange relates to other keywords that might appear in plain (i.e. prose) font.

Speaking of which, I might still owe David a follow-up PR.

@jddarcy and @pavelrappo, as I understood it, @liach is not suggesting that the term "void" in "primitive types and void" should be replaced by {@code void}.

Rather, {@code void} should be included in the enumeration of primitive types -- for example, by replacing and {@code double} with {@code double}, and {@code void}.

@jddarcy and @pavelrappo, as I understood it, @liach is not suggesting that the term "void" in "primitive types and void" should be replaced by {@code void}.

Rather, {@code void} should be included in the enumeration of primitive types -- for example, by replacing and {@code double} with {@code double}, and {@code void}.

AFAIK, that sentence enumerates primitive types, which according to the Java Language Specification ¹², do not include void.

Footnotes

https://docs.oracle.com/javase/specs/jls/se20/html/jls-4.html#jls-4.2 ↩

https://docs.oracle.com/javase/specs/jls/se20/html/jls-8.html#jls-8.4.5 ↩

Thanks for the links, @pavelrappo.

I understand the point you're making; however, there is still ambiguous wording in the documentation for this method.

The method is called isPrimitive, and it returns true for isPrimitive(void.class). In addition, the first sentence states: "Determines if the specified Class object represents a primitive type."

Note as well that the documentation states "There are nine predefined ..." but then goes on to only list 8 names.

So, in line with the intent of the method with regard to void, it should be clear to the user that void is the name for the type void.class (and Void.TYPE).

Perhaps the easiest way to include void.class and match the 9 predefined types with their names is to remove "primitive" from "as the primitive types that" and replace and {@code double} with {@code double}, and {@code void}.

Along that line of thinking, it might be best to change the first sentence to "Determines if the specified Class object represents a primitive type or void." And the return statement should be changed to @return true if and only if this class represents a primitive type or void.

Along that line of thinking, it might be best to change the first sentence to "Determines if the specified Class object represents a primitive type or void."

I was just about to suggest exactly that, but from the superinterface method's perspective. Here's what I had been writing when received your message:

At the same, time java.lang.invoke.TypeDescriptor.OfField#isPrimitive:

/** * Does this field descriptor describe a primitive type (including void.) * * @return whether this field descriptor describes a primitive type */ boolean isPrimitive();

I suggest rephrasing that and similar text elsewhere, for example, as follows:

/** {@return whether this field descriptor describes a primitive type or void} */ boolean isPrimitive();

The functionality of the method is "isPrimitiveTypeOrVoid" as void is technically not a type, etc.; however, the method is named "isPrimitive" and that is most of what it does.

AlanBateman · 2023-06-21T12:34:37Z

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

+     * <p>No other class objects are considered primitive.
+     *
+     * @apiNote
+     * These {@code Class} objects can be accessed via the {@code


It might be clearer if the API note starts with something like "A Class object representing a primitive type" rather than "These Class objects".

pavelrappo · 2023-06-23T17:44:23Z

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

+     * <p>No other class objects are considered primitive.
+     *
+     * @apiNote
+     * A {@code Class} object represented a primitive type can be


Not a native speaker, but "representED" not "representING"?

pavelrappo

Looks good to me.

openjdk · 2023-06-23T18:03:35Z

@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:

8310267: Javadoc for Class#isPrimitive() is incorrect regarding Class objects for primitives

Reviewed-by: prappo

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 13 new commits pushed to the master branch:

a9c0a0f: 8310628: GcInfoBuilder.c missing JNI Exception checks
556831d: 8310460: Remove jdeps -profile option
d91d0d3: 8310537: Fix -Wconversion warnings in gcUtil.hpp
7628da2: 8279254: PKCS9Attribute SigningTime always encoded in UTFTime
5ca4cdd: 8309740: Expand timeout windows for tests in JDK-8179502
e78fd46: 8310735: Build failure after JDK-8310577 with GCC8
4bf7816: 8309670: java -help output for --module-path / -p is incomplete
d1d2b55: 8309733: [macOS, Accessibility] VoiceOver: Incorrect announcements of JRadioButton
d6685f0: 8310510: Remove WordsPerLong
31dcda5: 8295210: IR framework should not whitelist -XX:-UseTLAB
... and 3 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/0e4fde3d300b91e6f93fe4d602f99251c75aa847...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 · 2023-06-23T18:08:51Z

Only after I have approved the change, did I re-read the whole thing again. Would you be able to fix this in this PR too? (Sorry.)

    /**
     * Determines if the specified {@code Class} object represents a
     * primitive type.
...

There's no "specified class object", it's this class object. That method has zero parameters.

jddarcy · 2023-06-23T19:34:26Z

/integrate

openjdk · 2023-06-23T19:35:58Z

Going to push as commit 0314292.
Since your change was applied there have been 13 commits pushed to the master branch:

a9c0a0f: 8310628: GcInfoBuilder.c missing JNI Exception checks
556831d: 8310460: Remove jdeps -profile option
d91d0d3: 8310537: Fix -Wconversion warnings in gcUtil.hpp
7628da2: 8279254: PKCS9Attribute SigningTime always encoded in UTFTime
5ca4cdd: 8309740: Expand timeout windows for tests in JDK-8179502
e78fd46: 8310735: Build failure after JDK-8310577 with GCC8
4bf7816: 8309670: java -help output for --module-path / -p is incomplete
d1d2b55: 8309733: [macOS, Accessibility] VoiceOver: Incorrect announcements of JRadioButton
d6685f0: 8310510: Remove WordsPerLong
31dcda5: 8295210: IR framework should not whitelist -XX:-UseTLAB
... and 3 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/0e4fde3d300b91e6f93fe4d602f99251c75aa847...master

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

openjdk · 2023-06-23T19:36:04Z

@jddarcy Pushed as commit 0314292.

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

sbrannen · 2023-06-25T13:49:59Z

Thanks for improving the documentation, @jddarcy. 👍

jddarcy added 2 commits June 20, 2023 16:58

JDK-8310267: Javadoc for Class#isPrimitive() is incorrect regarding C…

591ff80

…lass objects for primitives

Fix whitespace.

fdb9b67

openjdk bot added the rfr Pull request is ready for review label Jun 21, 2023

openjdk bot added the core-libs core-libs-dev@openjdk.org label Jun 21, 2023

liach reviewed Jun 21, 2023

View reviewed changes

AlanBateman reviewed Jun 21, 2023

View reviewed changes

jddarcy added 3 commits June 23, 2023 10:07

Merge branch 'master' into JDK-8310267

4311b12

Respond to review feedback.

e1a62bf

Respond to review feedback.

9d05b09

pavelrappo reviewed Jun 23, 2023

View reviewed changes

Fix typo.

9f4a555

pavelrappo approved these changes Jun 23, 2023

View reviewed changes

openjdk bot added the ready Pull request is ready to be integrated label Jun 23, 2023

Fix another typo and reflow paragraphs.

82a42ab

openjdk bot added the integrated Pull request has been integrated label Jun 23, 2023

openjdk bot closed this Jun 23, 2023

openjdk bot removed ready Pull request is ready to be integrated rfr Pull request is ready for review labels Jun 23, 2023

jddarcy deleted the JDK-8310267 branch October 17, 2024 16:54

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

JDK-8310267: Javadoc for Class#isPrimitive() is incorrect regarding Class objects for primitives #14574

JDK-8310267: Javadoc for Class#isPrimitive() is incorrect regarding Class objects for primitives #14574

jddarcy commented Jun 21, 2023 •

edited by openjdk bot

Loading

bridgekeeper bot commented Jun 21, 2023

openjdk bot commented Jun 21, 2023

mlbridge bot commented Jun 21, 2023 •

edited

Loading

liach Jun 21, 2023

jddarcy Jun 21, 2023

pavelrappo Jun 22, 2023

sbrannen Jun 23, 2023

pavelrappo Jun 23, 2023

sbrannen Jun 23, 2023 •

edited

Loading

pavelrappo Jun 23, 2023 •

edited

Loading

jddarcy Jun 23, 2023

AlanBateman Jun 21, 2023

pavelrappo Jun 23, 2023

pavelrappo left a comment

openjdk bot commented Jun 23, 2023

pavelrappo commented Jun 23, 2023 •

edited

Loading

jddarcy commented Jun 23, 2023

openjdk bot commented Jun 23, 2023

openjdk bot commented Jun 23, 2023

sbrannen commented Jun 25, 2023

JDK-8310267: Javadoc for Class#isPrimitive() is incorrect regarding Class objects for primitives #14574

JDK-8310267: Javadoc for Class#isPrimitive() is incorrect regarding Class objects for primitives #14574

Conversation

jddarcy commented Jun 21, 2023 • edited by openjdk bot Loading

Progress

Issue

Reviewers

Reviewing

Webrev

bridgekeeper bot commented Jun 21, 2023

openjdk bot commented Jun 21, 2023

mlbridge bot commented Jun 21, 2023 • edited Loading

Webrevs

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Footnotes

sbrannen Jun 23, 2023 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

pavelrappo Jun 23, 2023 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

pavelrappo left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

openjdk bot commented Jun 23, 2023

pavelrappo commented Jun 23, 2023 • edited Loading

jddarcy commented Jun 23, 2023

openjdk bot commented Jun 23, 2023

openjdk bot commented Jun 23, 2023

sbrannen commented Jun 25, 2023

jddarcy commented Jun 21, 2023 •

edited by openjdk bot

Loading

mlbridge bot commented Jun 21, 2023 •

edited

Loading

sbrannen Jun 23, 2023 •

edited

Loading

pavelrappo Jun 23, 2023 •

edited

Loading

pavelrappo commented Jun 23, 2023 •

edited

Loading