-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.8k
8253878: clean up nsk/share/jvmti/ArgumentHandler #443
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
👋 Welcome back iignatyev! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into |
* | ||
* @throws <i>BadOption</i> if admissible option has illegal value | ||
* | ||
* <i>false</i> if option is not admissible |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why is this line not indented?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I guess b/c this is how IDEA thinks @return
javadoc should be aligned. I have checked java.base
javadoc, and some classes have indentation here, some don't. either way is fine w/ me.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ok. I just noticed the indentation was removed and wondered why.
@@ -147,8 +123,8 @@ protected void checkOptions() { | |||
* Parse options string and add all recognized options and their values. | |||
* If optionString is <i>null</i> this method just does nothing. | |||
* | |||
* @throws BadOption if known option has illegel value | |||
* or all options are inconsistent | |||
* @throws BadOption if known option has illegal value |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Shouldn't BadOption use <i> or <code>?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
no, @throws
should be followed by exception class-name, see 1
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
ok
@iignatev 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:
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 3 new commits pushed to the
Please see this link for an up-to-date comparison between the source branch of this pull request and the ➡️ To integrate this PR with the above commit message to the |
thanks Chris. /integrate |
@iignatev Since your change was applied there have been 3 commits pushed to the
Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts. Pushed as commit 55c282b. 💡 You may see a message that your pull request was closed with unmerged commits. This can be safely ignored. |
Hi all,
could you please review this small patch which reformats
ArgumentHandler
, removes unusedfindOptionStringValue(String name, String defaultValue)
method, fixes typos?Progress
Issue
Reviewers
Download
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/443/head:pull/443
$ git checkout pull/443