8253736: Cleanup some of WorkArounds and usage thereof #412

jonathan-gibbons · 2020-09-29T20:25:27Z

This cleanup is primarily focussed on the WorkArounds class, simplifying/removing code that is no longer required.

Also, simplified DocLint initialization such that it no longer needs a JavacTask and so the initialization code can be moved out of WorkArounds.

The "constant value expression" in Utils is simplified to remove a redundant level of enclosing nested class for the type-kind visitor.

Progress

Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
Commit message must refer to an issue
Change must be properly reviewed

Issue

JDK-8253736: Cleanup some of WorkArounds and usage thereof

Reviewers

Vicente Romero (@vicente-romero-oracle - Reviewer)
Kumar Srinivasan (@kusrinivasan - Reviewer)

Download

$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/412/head:pull/412
$ git checkout pull/412

bridgekeeper · 2020-09-29T20:27:28Z

👋 Welcome back jjg! 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 · 2020-09-29T20:28:46Z

@jonathan-gibbons this pull request can not be integrated into master due to one or more merge conflicts. To resolve these merge conflicts and update this pull request you can run the following commands in the local repository for your personal fork:

git checkout 8253736-workarounds
git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk master
git merge FETCH_HEAD
# resolve conflicts and follow the instructions given by git merge
git commit -m "Merge master"
git push

openjdk · 2020-09-29T20:29:11Z

@jonathan-gibbons The following labels will be automatically applied to this pull request:

compiler
javadoc

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

mlbridge · 2020-09-29T21:06:39Z

Webrevs

00: Full (bc1e60c)

vicente-romero-oracle

just a nit comment, no need for another iteration, the changes looks good to me

vicente-romero-oracle · 2020-10-01T15:13:20Z

src/jdk.javadoc/share/classes/jdk/javadoc/internal/doclets/toolkit/WorkArounds.java

+        // info from a doclet to its taglets via a doclet-specific subtype of
+        // DocletEnvironment.
+        toolEnv = ((DocEnvImpl)this.configuration.docEnv).toolEnv;
+        javacTypes = toolEnv.getTypes();
    }

    /*
     * TODO: This method exists because of a bug in javac which does not


probably a good idea to include the bug ID here?

@vicente-romero-oracle This relates to a discussion we should have elsewhere, separately, about the interactions between deprecation and packages, and whether we should support depicted packages. JLS does not list packages in the list of kinds of elements that can be deprecated, in which case this comment is probably incorrect, as the bug may actually be here in javadoc for trying to support deprecated packages!

openjdk · 2020-10-01T15:19:19Z

@jonathan-gibbons 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 more details.

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

8253736: Cleanup some of WorkArounds and usage thereof

Reviewed-by: vromero, ksrini

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 62 new commits pushed to the master branch:

87d77eb: 8253879: Simplify redundant code in IndexBuilder
dffe9db: 8252537: Updated @exception with @throws
406db1c: 8253913: unify gtest test names
ea5a2b1: 8251464: make Node::dump(int depth) support indent
fff8c8d: 8253882: remove PropertyResolvingWrapper
7dcdc1f: 8253865: Pre-submit testing using GitHub Actions does not detect failures reliably
0fd41c3: 8253470: Javadoc clean up in Filter and Headers
f686a38: 8253926: Use extra_size correctly in anon_mmap_aligned
b8966e1: 8253928: G1: Remove G1ConcurrentMarkThread::set_in_progress declaration
4185ed3: 5078989: Null Pointer exception in SpinnerListMode
... and 52 more: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/compare/2fe0a5d75ee9434017b3df5cfa713ef895a19866...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.

jonathan-gibbons · 2020-10-01T17:20:29Z

/reviewers 2

openjdk · 2020-10-01T17:20:44Z

@jonathan-gibbons
The number of required reviews for this PR is now set to 2 (with at least 1 of role reviewers).

jonathan-gibbons · 2020-10-01T17:22:29Z

@vicente-romero-oracle thanks for the review.
I raised the number of reviewers to have a javadoc reviewer participate as well.

kusrinivasan

Nice to see WorkArounds being chipped away. It is not clear to me if additional tests are warranted for getConstantValue for TestConstantValuesDriver.java, in langtools test I saw only ElementStructureTest.java. I will leave it to you, maybe file a follow up issue.

kusrinivasan · 2020-10-01T23:20:55Z

src/jdk.javadoc/share/classes/jdk/javadoc/internal/doclets/toolkit/util/Utils.java

-                public String visitPrimitiveAsBoolean(PrimitiveType t, Object val) {
-                    return (int)val == 0 ? "false" : "true";
-                }
+        return cve.visit(ve.asType(), ve.getConstantValue());


kusrinivasan · 2020-10-01T23:23:54Z

test/langtools/jdk/javadoc/doclet/constantValues/TestConstantValuesDriver.java

@@ -57,15 +57,15 @@ public void test() {
                """
                    <code id="TestConstantValues.BYTE_MAX_VALUE">public&nbsp;static&nbsp;final&nbsp;byte</code></td>
                    <th class="col-second" scope="row"><code><a href="TestConstantValues.html#BYTE_MAX_VALUE">BYTE_MAX_VALUE</a></code></th>
-                    <td class="col-last"><code>127</code></td>""",
+                    <td class="col-last"><code>0x7f</code></td>""",


Should there be tests for Float, Double, Long ?

https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8253941

jonathan-gibbons · 2020-10-02T16:14:21Z

/integrate

openjdk · 2020-10-02T16:16:03Z

@jonathan-gibbons Since your change was applied there have been 62 commits pushed to the master branch:

87d77eb: 8253879: Simplify redundant code in IndexBuilder
dffe9db: 8252537: Updated @exception with @throws
406db1c: 8253913: unify gtest test names
ea5a2b1: 8251464: make Node::dump(int depth) support indent
fff8c8d: 8253882: remove PropertyResolvingWrapper
7dcdc1f: 8253865: Pre-submit testing using GitHub Actions does not detect failures reliably
0fd41c3: 8253470: Javadoc clean up in Filter and Headers
f686a38: 8253926: Use extra_size correctly in anon_mmap_aligned
b8966e1: 8253928: G1: Remove G1ConcurrentMarkThread::set_in_progress declaration
4185ed3: 5078989: Null Pointer exception in SpinnerListMode
... and 52 more: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/compare/2fe0a5d75ee9434017b3df5cfa713ef895a19866...master

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

Pushed as commit 7778047.

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

Cleanup some of WorkArounds and usage thereof.

16c04aa

openjdk bot added the merge-conflict Pull request has merge conflict with target branch label Sep 29, 2020

openjdk bot added javadoc javadoc-dev@openjdk.org compiler compiler-dev@openjdk.org labels Sep 29, 2020

jonathan-gibbons added 2 commits September 29, 2020 13:39

Merge master

2ce3661

Adjust for DocLint move

bc1e60c

openjdk bot removed the merge-conflict Pull request has merge conflict with target branch label Sep 29, 2020

jonathan-gibbons changed the title ~~Cleanup some of WorkArounds and usage thereof.~~ 8253736: Cleanup some of WorkArounds and usage thereof. Sep 29, 2020

openjdk bot added the rfr Pull request is ready for review label Sep 29, 2020

jonathan-gibbons changed the title ~~8253736: Cleanup some of WorkArounds and usage thereof.~~ 8253736: Cleanup some of WorkArounds and usage thereof Sep 29, 2020

vicente-romero-oracle approved these changes Oct 1, 2020

View reviewed changes

openjdk bot added the ready Pull request is ready to be integrated label Oct 1, 2020

openjdk bot removed the ready Pull request is ready to be integrated label Oct 1, 2020

kusrinivasan approved these changes Oct 2, 2020

View reviewed changes

openjdk bot added the ready Pull request is ready to be integrated label Oct 2, 2020

openjdk bot closed this Oct 2, 2020

openjdk bot added integrated Pull request has been integrated and removed ready Pull request is ready to be integrated rfr Pull request is ready for review labels Oct 2, 2020

jonathan-gibbons deleted the 8253736-workarounds branch November 4, 2020 00:35

8253736: Cleanup some of WorkArounds and usage thereof #412

8253736: Cleanup some of WorkArounds and usage thereof #412

jonathan-gibbons commented Sep 29, 2020 •

edited by openjdk bot

bridgekeeper bot commented Sep 29, 2020

openjdk bot commented Sep 29, 2020

openjdk bot commented Sep 29, 2020

mlbridge bot commented Sep 29, 2020

vicente-romero-oracle left a comment

vicente-romero-oracle Oct 1, 2020

jonathan-gibbons Oct 1, 2020

openjdk bot commented Oct 1, 2020 •

edited

jonathan-gibbons commented Oct 1, 2020

openjdk bot commented Oct 1, 2020

jonathan-gibbons commented Oct 1, 2020

kusrinivasan left a comment

kusrinivasan Oct 1, 2020

kusrinivasan Oct 1, 2020

jonathan-gibbons Oct 2, 2020

jonathan-gibbons commented Oct 2, 2020

openjdk bot commented Oct 2, 2020

8253736: Cleanup some of WorkArounds and usage thereof #412

8253736: Cleanup some of WorkArounds and usage thereof #412

Conversation

jonathan-gibbons commented Sep 29, 2020 • edited by openjdk bot

Progress

Issue

Reviewers

Download

bridgekeeper bot commented Sep 29, 2020

openjdk bot commented Sep 29, 2020

openjdk bot commented Sep 29, 2020

mlbridge bot commented Sep 29, 2020

Webrevs

vicente-romero-oracle left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

vicente-romero-oracle Oct 1, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jonathan-gibbons Oct 1, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

openjdk bot commented Oct 1, 2020 • edited

jonathan-gibbons commented Oct 1, 2020

openjdk bot commented Oct 1, 2020

jonathan-gibbons commented Oct 1, 2020

kusrinivasan left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

kusrinivasan Oct 1, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

kusrinivasan Oct 1, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jonathan-gibbons Oct 2, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jonathan-gibbons commented Oct 2, 2020

openjdk bot commented Oct 2, 2020

jonathan-gibbons commented Sep 29, 2020 •

edited by openjdk bot

openjdk bot commented Oct 1, 2020 •

edited