JDK-8278953: Clarify Class.getDeclaredConstructor specification

[jddarcy]

Cleanup and regularization of the specs of the four get[Declared]Constructor[s] methods.

---

Progress

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

Issue

• JDK-8278953: Clarify Class.getDeclaredConstructor specification

Reviewers

• Mandy Chung (@mlchung - Reviewer)
• Alan Bateman (@AlanBateman - Reviewer)

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/6897/head:pull/6897
$ git checkout pull/6897

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/6897
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk pull/6897/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 6897

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 6897

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/6897.diff

[bridgekeeper]

👋 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]

@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]

Webrevs

• 00: Full (3fffe807)

[mlchung]

LGTM

[openjdk]

@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:

8278953: Clarify Class.getDeclaredConstructor specification

Reviewed-by: mchung, 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 9 new commits pushed to the master branch:

• 4c78c9a: 8270929: Obsolete the FilterSpuriousWakeups flag in JDK 19
• 06206c7: 8278949: Cleanups for 8277850
• 31fbb87: 6462028: MaskFormatter API documentation refers to getDisplayValue
• 63e4303: 8278519: serviceability/jvmti/FieldAccessWatch/FieldAccessWatch.java failed "assert(handle != __null) failed: JNI handle should not be null"
• 6f0e8da: 8278871: [JVMCI] assert((uint)reason < 2* _trap_hist_limit) failed: oob
• 3c10b5d: 8278104: C1 should support the compiler directive 'BreakAtExecute'
• cc44e13: 8278623: compiler/vectorapi/reshape/TestVectorCastAVX512.java after JDK-8259610
• 905b763: 8261404: Class.getReflectionFactory() is not thread-safe
• 022e4f0: 8275242: Remove redundant stream() call before forEach in jdk.compiler

Please see this link for an up-to-date comparison between the source branch of this pull request and the master branch.
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.

[AlanBateman]

This looks okay, just wondering if expanded NoSuchMethodException description warrants a CSR.

[jddarcy]

This looks okay, just wondering if expanded NoSuchMethodException description warrants a CSR.

Hmm. I don't think a CSR is strictly necessary as the additional conditions are arguably implied by the rest of the spec, but I can run a quick CSR for this.

I have not written new regression tests for this fix, but quickly checked in jshell that the expected exceptions are indeed thrown.

[jddarcy]

CSR filed and approved: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8279046

[jddarcy]

/integrate

[openjdk]

Going to push as commit 5179672.
Since your change was applied there have been 10 commits pushed to the master branch:

• 8549d8b: 8277100: Dynamic dump can inadvertently overwrite default CDS archive
• 4c78c9a: 8270929: Obsolete the FilterSpuriousWakeups flag in JDK 19
• 06206c7: 8278949: Cleanups for 8277850
• 31fbb87: 6462028: MaskFormatter API documentation refers to getDisplayValue
• 63e4303: 8278519: serviceability/jvmti/FieldAccessWatch/FieldAccessWatch.java failed "assert(handle != __null) failed: JNI handle should not be null"
• 6f0e8da: 8278871: [JVMCI] assert((uint)reason < 2* _trap_hist_limit) failed: oob
• 3c10b5d: 8278104: C1 should support the compiler directive 'BreakAtExecute'
• cc44e13: 8278623: compiler/vectorapi/reshape/TestVectorCastAVX512.java after JDK-8259610
• 905b763: 8261404: Class.getReflectionFactory() is not thread-safe
• 022e4f0: 8275242: Remove redundant stream() call before forEach in jdk.compiler

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

[openjdk]

@jddarcy Pushed as commit 5179672.

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