-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 65
JDK-8273452: DocTrees.getDocCommentTree should be specified as idempotent #36
Conversation
👋 Welcome back hannesw! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into |
Webrevs
|
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 it's a gray area whether it should be an implSpec
or an implNote
.
It is a relatively important aspect of the API, because the operations are expensive, and even cause some downstream caching.
For now, it's enough that it is noted in some fashion.
As a general style note, I would suggest a blank line before each implNote
, and change "The implementation of this method" to either "The default implementation of this method" or just "This implementation".
@hns 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:
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 52 new commits pushed to the
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 |
/integrate |
Going to push as commit 354c904.
Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts. |
Please review a doc-only change to add implementation notes to the
DocTrees.getDocCommentTree
methods, some of which return the sameDocCommentTree
instance on repeated invocation and some don't. I decided to use@implNote
instead of@implSpec
as usually I wouldn't expect object identity to be part of a Java API specification.I verified the described behavior using code analysis and enhancing existing tests. The latter are not included in the commit as this is a
noreg-doc
issue.Progress
Issue
Reviewers
Reviewing
Using
git
Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk18 pull/36/head:pull/36
$ git checkout pull/36
Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/36
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk18 pull/36/head
Using Skara CLI tools
Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 36
View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 36
Using diff file
Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk18/pull/36.diff