8380956: HexFormat shoud have @ValueBased

[YaSuenag]

In #30392, we found out HexFormat is marked as value based class in Javadoc, but they do not have @ValueBased.

 * <p>
 * This is a <a href="{@docRoot}/java.base/java/lang/doc-files/ValueBased.html">value-based</a>
 * class; use of identity-sensitive operations (including reference equality
 * ({@code ==}), identity hash code, or synchronization) on instances of
 * {@code HexFormat} may have unpredictable results and should be avoided.
 * The {@code equals} method should be used for comparisons.
 * <p>
 * This class is immutable and thread-safe.
 * <p>
 * Unless otherwise noted, passing a null argument to any method will cause a
 * {@link java.lang.NullPointerException NullPointerException} to be thrown.
 *
 * @since 17
 */


public final class HexFormat {

---

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-8380956: HexFormat shoud have @ValueBased (Bug - P4)

Reviewers

• Roger Riggs (@RogerRiggs - Reviewer)
• Thomas Stuefe (@tstuefe - Reviewer)
• Chen Liang (@liach - Reviewer)

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/30444/head:pull/30444
$ git checkout pull/30444

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/30444
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/30444/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 30444

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 30444

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/30444.diff

Using Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

[bridgekeeper]

👋 Welcome back ysuenaga! 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]

@YaSuenag 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:

8380956: HexFormat shoud have @ValueBased

Reviewed-by: rriggs, stuefe, liach

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 15 new commits pushed to the master branch:

• 8ecb14c: 8379454: SA still calculates end address with incorrect alignment
• 22831cb: 8378005: Exclude boxing calls from guaranteed safepoint check in loop opts
• b3048bb: 8370504: InterpreterMacroAssembler::profile_virtual_call parameter 'receiver_can_be_null' is unused
• ... and 12 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/3588fb79691b3829bab214a4bb1517fd382cccaf...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.

[openjdk]

@YaSuenag 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]

Webrevs

• 00: Full (2d7487b4)

[RogerRiggs]

Looks fine.

[RogerRiggs]

There is no particular value to the annotation, except for consistency.

[tstuefe]

+1

[liach]

There is no particular value to the annotation, except for consistency.

I think JFR scans this annotation in class files and emits warning events upon synchronization.

[AlanBateman]

It looks like the note on value-based is going into the API note, same thing with the normative text about NPE. Doesn't have to be this PR but I think we should consider moving the text up so that it appears before the API note heading.

[YaSuenag]

I think it should be do in another issue because it affects all of value based classes, and also the text is not normalized. For example:

HexFormat.java:

 * <p>
 * This is a <a href="{@docRoot}/java.base/java/lang/doc-files/ValueBased.html">value-based</a>
 * class; use of identity-sensitive operations (including reference equality
 * ({@code ==}), identity hash code, or synchronization) on instances of
 * {@code HexFormat} may have unpredictable results and should be avoided.
 * The {@code equals} method should be used for comparisons.
 * <p>
 * This class is immutable and thread-safe.
 * <p>

Linker.java:

 * @implSpec
 * Implementations of this interface are immutable, thread-safe and
 * <a href="{@docRoot}/java.base/java/lang/doc-files/ValueBased.html">value-based</a>.

[AlanBateman]

I think it should be do in another issue because it affects all of value based classes, and also the text is not normalized.

That's okay, it's clear we have several cases in the docs where normative and other text that appears after the @apiNote makes it appear that the text is part of the API note.

On a few occasions I've made to move the custom block tags that are @apiNote, @implNote .. and the text to the end of the class or method description to avoid the issue. A JEP has been submitted to add "Rish Notes" to API documentation that make help with some of these cases.

[YaSuenag]

/integrate

[openjdk]

Going to push as commit 2994524.
Since your change was applied there have been 33 commits pushed to the master branch:

• b242eef: 8380656: G1: Refactor G1IHOPControl
• cca8c23: 8380999: Update IPSupport by adding diagnoseConfigurationIssue() method
• c0e500a: 8379794: C2: UBSAN runtime error: shift exponent 64 is too large for 64-bit type 'long unsigned int'
• ... and 30 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/3588fb79691b3829bab214a4bb1517fd382cccaf...master

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

[openjdk]

@YaSuenag Pushed as commit 2994524.

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