JDK-8290126: Add a check in JavadocTester for "javadoc should not crash"

[jonathan-gibbons]

Please review a simple update to JavadocTester to provide a default-on check that no stack traces were written to the STDERR stream.

There are also some minor cleanup edits suggested by the IDE.

---

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-8290126: Add a check in JavadocTester for "javadoc should not crash"

Reviewers

• Pavel Rappo (@pavelrappo - Reviewer) ⚠️ Review applies to 24be548e

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk pull/9458/head:pull/9458
$ git checkout pull/9458

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/9458
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk pull/9458/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 9458

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 9458

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/9458.diff

[bridgekeeper]

👋 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]

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

• javadoc

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

• 06: Full - Incremental (a3884dd4)
• 05: Full - Incremental (24be548e)
• 04: Full - Incremental (0b22f653)
• 03: Full - Incremental (0d461e3f)
• 02: Full - Incremental (9d4859f1)
• 01: Full - Incremental (2a970211)
• 00: Full (7cd05a1f)

[pavelrappo]

This PR could use the feature it introduces. It would test drive the feature and ensure that the feature works. A brief search showed these potential candidates in test/langtools/jdk/javadoc/:

1. doclet/InheritDocForUserTags/DocTest.java:57
2. tool/BadOptionsTest.java:83,96,108,120,132
3. doclet/testCustomTagletRegistration/TestRegistrationErrors.java:76
4. doclet/testSnippetTag/SnippetTester.java:55

[jonathan-gibbons]

This PR could use the feature it introduces. It would test drive the feature and ensure that the feature works. A brief search showed these potential candidates in test/langtools/jdk/javadoc/:

1. doclet/InheritDocForUserTags/DocTest.java:57
2. tool/BadOptionsTest.java:83,96,108,120,132
3. doclet/testCustomTagletRegistration/TestRegistrationErrors.java:76
4. doclet/testSnippetTag/SnippetTester.java:55

Like other similar features, the feature is "default on", so it is currently active for all tests.

[pavelrappo]

This PR could use the feature it introduces. It would test drive the feature and ensure that the feature works. A brief search showed these potential candidates in test/langtools/jdk/javadoc/:

1. doclet/InheritDocForUserTags/DocTest.java:57
2. tool/BadOptionsTest.java:83,96,108,120,132
3. doclet/testCustomTagletRegistration/TestRegistrationErrors.java:76
4. doclet/testSnippetTag/SnippetTester.java:55

Like other similar features, the feature is "default on", so it is currently active for all tests.

Then I assume you'll see test failures if you change at com.sun. and don't update the tests that expect exceptions.

[jonathan-gibbons]

This PR could use the feature it introduces. It would test drive the feature and ensure that the feature works. A brief search showed these potential candidates in test/langtools/jdk/javadoc/:

1. doclet/InheritDocForUserTags/DocTest.java:57
2. tool/BadOptionsTest.java:83,96,108,120,132
3. doclet/testCustomTagletRegistration/TestRegistrationErrors.java:76
4. doclet/testSnippetTag/SnippetTester.java:55

Like other similar features, the feature is "default on", so it is currently active for all tests.

Then I assume you'll see test failures if you change at com.sun. and don't update the tests that expect exceptions.

I removed the now almost useless check for at com.sun in DocTest.java ... it was still minimally functional because of jtreg on the stack.

I left in all the other existing checks for no stack traces or exception because they do not exactly match the new check.

There are very few tests that actually check for exceptions: TestTFMBuilder.java is it, and that uses the new ability to disable the check for stack traces. See TestTFMBuilder.java line 164 in this PR.

If it needs to be said, all javadoc tests pass with these changes.

[pavelrappo]

It would be great if you could update the copyright year in TestTFMBuilder.java.

[openjdk]

@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 details.

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

8290126: Add a check in JavadocTester for "javadoc should not crash"

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 11 new commits pushed to the master branch:

• 0a4d0ce: 8293121: (fs) Refactor UnixFileSystem copying into generic Unix, Linux, and BSD implementations
• 032be16: 8292066: Convert TestInputArgument.sh and TestSystemLoadAvg.sh to java version
• e393973: 8292990: Improve test coverage for XPath Axes: parent
• fa68371: 8292584: assert(cb != __null) failed: must be with -XX:-Inline
• 04d8069: 8230374: maxOutputSize, instead of javatest.maxOutputSize, should be used in TEST.properties
• 3d254d3: 8289510: Improve test coverage for XPath Axes: namespace
• 2d18dda: 8173605: Remove support for source and target 1.7 option in javac
• 7c2f299: 8293202: Document how to edit doc/testing, doc/building
• 07616de: 8175382: clhsdb pmap should print the end addresses of the load modules
• 9444a08: 8290709: Incorrect dominance error for unconditional pattern vs. null
• ... and 1 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/5204528296a53d7dc77e67b26be23a64692527fa...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]

/integrate

[openjdk]

Going to push as commit 0fb9469.
Since your change was applied there have been 11 commits pushed to the master branch:

• 0a4d0ce: 8293121: (fs) Refactor UnixFileSystem copying into generic Unix, Linux, and BSD implementations
• 032be16: 8292066: Convert TestInputArgument.sh and TestSystemLoadAvg.sh to java version
• e393973: 8292990: Improve test coverage for XPath Axes: parent
• fa68371: 8292584: assert(cb != __null) failed: must be with -XX:-Inline
• 04d8069: 8230374: maxOutputSize, instead of javatest.maxOutputSize, should be used in TEST.properties
• 3d254d3: 8289510: Improve test coverage for XPath Axes: namespace
• 2d18dda: 8173605: Remove support for source and target 1.7 option in javac
• 7c2f299: 8293202: Document how to edit doc/testing, doc/building
• 07616de: 8175382: clhsdb pmap should print the end addresses of the load modules
• 9444a08: 8290709: Incorrect dominance error for unconditional pattern vs. null
• ... and 1 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/5204528296a53d7dc77e67b26be23a64692527fa...master

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

[openjdk]

@jonathan-gibbons Pushed as commit 0fb9469.

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