8326951: since-checker - missing @ since tags #18055

nizarbenalla · 2024-02-29T09:45:35Z

I added @since tags for methods/constructors that do not match the @since of the enclosing class.

The write method already existed in PrintStream in earlier versions and instances of it could always call this method, since it extends FilterOutputStream which has the method.

for MappedByteBuffer slice() and MappedByteBuffer slice(int index, int length), the return type changed from ByteBuffer to MappedByteBuffer. And the checker tool differentiates between them because of that.

This is similar to #18032 and #18373

For context, I am writing tests to check for accurate use of @since tags in documentation comments in source code.
We're following these rules for now:

Rule 1: Introduction of New Elements

If an element is new in JDK N, with no equivalent in JDK N-1, it must include @since N.
- Exception: Member elements (fields, methods, nested classes) may omit @since if their version matches the value specified for the enclosing class or interface.

Rule 2: Existing Elements in Subsequent JDK Versions

If an element exists in JDK N, with an equivalent in JDK N-1, it should not include @since N.

Rule 3: Handling Missing `@since` Tags in methods if there is no `@since`

When inspecting methods, prioritize the @since annotation of the supertype's overridden method.
If unavailable or if the enclosing class's @since is newer, use the enclosing element's @since.

I.e. if A extends B, and we add a method to B in JDK N, and add an override of the method to A in JDK M (M > N), we will use N as the effective @since for the method.

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

Warning

⚠️ Found leading lowercase letter in issue title for 8326951: since-checker - missing @ since tags

Issue

JDK-8326951: since-checker - missing @ since tags (Sub-task - P4)(⚠️ The fixVersion in this issue is [24] but the fixVersion in .jcheck/conf is 23, a new backport will be created when this pr is integrated.)

Reviewers

Jaikiran Pai (@jaikiran - Reviewer)

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/18055/head:pull/18055
$ git checkout pull/18055

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/18055
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/18055/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 18055

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 18055

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/18055.diff

Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

…wing bug report JDK-8326951

bridgekeeper · 2024-02-29T09:46:19Z

Hi @nizarbenalla, welcome to this OpenJDK project and thanks for contributing!

We do not recognize you as Contributor and need to ensure you have signed the Oracle Contributor Agreement (OCA). If you have not signed the OCA, please follow the instructions. Please fill in your GitHub username in the "Username" field of the application. Once you have signed the OCA, please let us know by writing /signed in a comment in this pull request.

If you already are an OpenJDK Author, Committer or Reviewer, please click here to open a new issue so that we can record that fact. Please use "Add GitHub user nizarbenalla" as summary for the issue.

If you are contributing this work on behalf of your employer and your employer has signed the OCA, please let us know by writing /covered in a comment in this pull request.

openjdk · 2024-02-29T09:47:17Z

@nizarbenalla The following labels will be automatically applied to this pull request:

core-libs
nio

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.

nizarbenalla · 2024-03-11T14:48:35Z

/covered

bridgekeeper · 2024-03-11T16:37:29Z

You are already a known contributor!

openjdk · 2024-03-13T20:12:08Z

@nizarbenalla 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:

8326951: since-checker - missing @ since tags

Reviewed-by: jpai

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 294 new commits pushed to the master branch:

31f7039: 8316131: runtime/cds/appcds/TestParallelGCWithCDS.java fails with JNI error
4a1cdd5: 8333486: Parallel: Remove unused methods in psParallelCompact
664c993: 8331731: ubsan: relocInfo.cpp:155:30: runtime error: applying non-zero offset to null pointer
8d3de45: 8325168: JShell should support Markdown comments
9ee741d: 8332015: since-checker - Add @ since tags to jdk.httpserver
0f4154a: 8331193: Return references when possible in GrowableArray
64bbae7: 8333394: C2: assert(bol->is_Opaque4() || bol->is_OpaqueInitializedAssertionPredicate()) failed: Opaque node of non-null-check or of Initialized Assertion Predicate
c7495fb: 8333444: Parallel: Inline PSParallelCompact::mark_obj
454660d: 8332900: RISC-V: refactor nativeInst_riscv.cpp and macroAssembler_riscv.cpp
67d6f3c: 8332905: C2 SuperWord: bad AD file, with RotateRightV and first operand not a pack
... and 284 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/5ded8da676d62158d0011086d7f80ff2c9096e13...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.

As you do not have Committer status in this project an existing Committer must agree to sponsor your change. Possible candidates are the reviewers of this PR (@jaikiran) but any other Committer may sponsor as well.

➡️ To flag this PR as ready for integration with the above commit message, type /integrate in a new comment. (Afterwards, your sponsor types /sponsor in a new comment to perform the integration).

mlbridge · 2024-03-15T11:34:48Z

Webrevs

jaikiran · 2024-03-16T00:20:51Z

src/java.base/share/classes/javax/crypto/interfaces/DHPublicKey.java

@@ -65,7 +65,6 @@ public interface DHPublicKey extends DHKey, java.security.PublicKey {
     * The default implementation returns {@code null}.
     *
     * @return {@inheritDoc java.security.AsymmetricKey}
-     * @since 22


Hello Nizar, are the removal of @since in this PR intentional? I haven't checked all of them, but this specific removal appears incorrect, since this method was indeed introduced in Java 22 as part of https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8318096.

Hello Jaikiran,
in jdk21 DHPPublicKey did have a getParams() method, so it is not new in jdk 22. It also existed before that

If you haven't looked at the other cases, I was about to group the changes related to the Key interfaces in a separate PR if that's fine. let me know what you think

Hello,

While the override of getParams in DHPublicKey was added, the getParams method has been inherited to DHPublicKey for a long time from DHKey. E.g., I can take this:

import javax.crypto.interfaces.DHPublicKey; public class DhkeyTest { public static void main(DHPublicKey key) { System.err.println(key.getParams()); } }

and compile using JDK 8 without any compile-time errors. So, it would make more sense to me to not add the @since for it.

I believe Nizar will separate the changes to the Key interfaces into a separate PR, so we can discuss in more detail there.

Thanks!

Hello Jan, interesting. I hadn't noticed that javax.crypto.interfaces.DHPublicKey already was exposing getParams() in earlier versions because javax.crypto.interfaces.DHPublicKey extends from javax.crypto.interfaces.DHKey which has the getParams() method.

I believe Nizar will separate the changes to the Key interfaces into a separate PR, so we can discuss in more detail there.

That sounds fine to me.

This reverts commit 5da3f0d.

This reverts commit 2c04a9d.

This reverts commit 9ddd230.

…-tags

nizarbenalla · 2024-06-04T00:38:45Z

Here is a snippet from the report of the checker with the relevant bits for this PR

STDERR:
method: void java.io.PrintStream.write(byte[]): `@since` version is 14 but the element exists before JDK 10
method: java.lang.invoke.MethodHandle java.lang.invoke.MethodHandles.tableSwitch(java.lang.invoke.MethodHandle,java.lang.invoke.MethodHandle[]): `@since` version is 9 instead of 17
method: void java.lang.reflect.MalformedParameterizedTypeException.<init>(java.lang.String): `@since` version is 9 instead of 10
method: java.nio.MappedByteBuffer java.nio.MappedByteBuffer.slice(): `@since` version is 9 instead of 17
method: java.nio.MappedByteBuffer java.nio.MappedByteBuffer.slice(int,int): `@since` version is 9 instead of 17
method: java.nio.MappedByteBuffer java.nio.MappedByteBuffer.duplicate(): `@since` version is 9 instead of 17
method: java.nio.MappedByteBuffer java.nio.MappedByteBuffer.compact(): `@since` version is 9 instead of 17
method: void java.util.Properties.<init>(int): `@since` version is 9 instead of 10
method: float java.util.concurrent.ThreadLocalRandom.nextFloat(float): `@since` version is 9 instead of 17
method: float java.util.concurrent.ThreadLocalRandom.nextFloat(float,float): `@since` version is 9 instead of 17
method: void java.util.zip.Deflater.setDictionary(java.nio.ByteBuffer): `@since` version is 9 instead of 11

Here is the full report

STDERR:
method: void java.io.PrintStream.write(byte[]): `@since` version is 14 but the element exists before JDK 10
method: byte[] java.io.FileInputStream.readNBytes(int): `@since` version is 9 instead of 11
method: java.lang.classfile.Signature.ClassTypeSig java.lang.classfile.ClassSignature.superclassSignature(): `@since` version is 22 instead of 23
method: java.lang.classfile.constantpool.PoolEntry java.lang.classfile.ClassReader.readEntryOrNull(int,java.lang.Class): `@since` version is 24 instead of 23
method: java.lang.classfile.constantpool.PoolEntry java.lang.classfile.constantpool.ConstantPool.entryByIndex(int,java.lang.Class): `@since` version is 24 instead of 23
method: java.lang.Class java.lang.constant.ClassDesc.resolveConstantDesc(java.lang.invoke.MethodHandles.Lookup): `@since` version is 12 instead of 21
method: java.lang.invoke.MethodType java.lang.constant.MethodTypeDesc.resolveConstantDesc(java.lang.invoke.MethodHandles.Lookup): `@since` version is 12 instead of 21
method: java.lang.invoke.MethodHandle java.lang.constant.MethodHandleDesc.resolveConstantDesc(java.lang.invoke.MethodHandles.Lookup): `@since` version is 12 instead of 21
method: long java.lang.foreign.MemorySegment.maxByteAlignment(): `@since` version is 22 instead of 23
method: java.lang.invoke.MethodHandle java.lang.invoke.MethodHandles.tableSwitch(java.lang.invoke.MethodHandle,java.lang.invoke.MethodHandle[]): `@since` version is 9 instead of 17
method: java.lang.Object java.lang.ref.Reference.clone(): `@since` version is 11 but the element exists before JDK 10
method: void java.lang.reflect.MalformedParameterizedTypeException.<init>(java.lang.String): `@since` version is 9 instead of 10
method: java.nio.MappedByteBuffer java.nio.MappedByteBuffer.slice(): `@since` version is 9 instead of 17
method: java.nio.MappedByteBuffer java.nio.MappedByteBuffer.slice(int,int): `@since` version is 9 instead of 17
method: java.nio.MappedByteBuffer java.nio.MappedByteBuffer.duplicate(): `@since` version is 9 instead of 17
method: java.nio.MappedByteBuffer java.nio.MappedByteBuffer.compact(): `@since` version is 9 instead of 17
method: boolean java.text.ChoiceFormat.isStrict(): `@since` version is 9 instead of 23
method: void java.text.ChoiceFormat.setStrict(boolean): `@since` version is 9 instead of 23
method: void java.util.Properties.<init>(int): `@since` version is 9 instead of 10
method: java.lang.Object java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.resultNow(): `@since` version is 9 instead of 19
method: java.lang.Throwable java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.exceptionNow(): `@since` version is 9 instead of 19
method: java.util.concurrent.Future.State java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.state(): `@since` version is 9 instead of 19
method: float java.util.concurrent.ThreadLocalRandom.nextFloat(float): `@since` version is 9 instead of 17
method: float java.util.concurrent.ThreadLocalRandom.nextFloat(float,float): `@since` version is 9 instead of 17
method: java.util.concurrent.Future.State java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinTask.state(): `@since` version is 9 instead of 19
method: java.lang.Object java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinTask.resultNow(): `@since` version is 9 instead of 19
method: java.lang.Throwable java.util.concurrent.ForkJoinTask.exceptionNow(): `@since` version is 9 instead of 19
method: java.util.concurrent.Delayed java.util.concurrent.DelayQueue.remove(): `@since` version is 9 instead of 21
method: java.lang.Object java.util.concurrent.CompletableFuture.resultNow(): `@since` version is 9 instead of 19
method: java.lang.Throwable java.util.concurrent.CompletableFuture.exceptionNow(): `@since` version is 9 instead of 19
method: java.util.concurrent.CompletableFuture java.util.concurrent.CompletableFuture.exceptionallyAsync(java.util.function.Function): `@since` version is 9 instead of 12
method: java.util.concurrent.CompletableFuture java.util.concurrent.CompletableFuture.exceptionallyAsync(java.util.function.Function,java.util.concurrent.Executor): `@since` version is 9 instead of 12
method: java.util.concurrent.CompletableFuture java.util.concurrent.CompletableFuture.exceptionallyCompose(java.util.function.Function): `@since` version is 9 instead of 12
method: java.util.concurrent.CompletableFuture java.util.concurrent.CompletableFuture.exceptionallyComposeAsync(java.util.function.Function): `@since` version is 9 instead of 12
method: java.util.concurrent.CompletableFuture java.util.concurrent.CompletableFuture.exceptionallyComposeAsync(java.util.function.Function,java.util.concurrent.Executor): `@since` version is 9 instead of 12
method: java.util.concurrent.Future.State java.util.concurrent.CompletableFuture.state(): `@since` version is 9 instead of 19
method: void java.util.zip.Deflater.setDictionary(java.nio.ByteBuffer): `@since` version is 9 instead of 11
java.lang.Exception: The `@since` checker found 37 problems
        at SinceChecker.checkModule(SinceChecker.java:262)
        at SinceChecker.main(SinceChecker.java:123)
        at java.base/jdk.internal.reflect.DirectMethodHandleAccessor.invoke(DirectMethodHandleAccessor.java:103)
        at java.base/java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:580)
        at com.sun.javatest.regtest.agent.MainActionHelper$AgentVMRunnable.run(MainActionHelper.java:333)
        at java.base/java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:1575)

JavaTest Message: Test threw exception: java.lang.Exception
JavaTest Message: shutting down test


TEST RESULT: Failed. Execution failed: `main' threw exception: java.lang.Exception: The `@since` checker found 37 problems
--------------------------------------------------

jaikiran · 2024-06-04T11:35:19Z

src/java.base/share/classes/java/io/PrintStream.java

@@ -679,8 +679,6 @@ private void implWrite(byte[] buf, int off, int len) throws IOException {
     *
     * @see #writeBytes(byte[])
     * @see #write(byte[],int,int)
-     *
-     * @since 14


The @since 14 was added here as part of https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8187898. The CSR explains what the changes were https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8230625. As noted in that CSR's specification (and attached images), the change for this method in that issue ended up being just API clarification (through a @apiNote) and no other change to this specific method. It continued to have the same signature including the throws clause that was previously available on this class through the super FilterOutputStream#write(byte[]) method.

So removing this @since 14 looks correct to me.

jaikiran · 2024-06-04T11:38:45Z

src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/invoke/MethodHandles.java

@@ -7919,6 +7919,8 @@ private static void tryFinallyChecks(MethodHandle target, MethodHandle cleanup)
     *                                  handles is not {@code int}, or if the types of
     *                                  the fallback handle and all of target handles are
     *                                  not the same.
+     *
+     * @since 17
     */
    public static MethodHandle tableSwitch(MethodHandle fallback, MethodHandle... targets) {


This method was introduced in Java 17 through https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8263087. So this addition of @since 17 looks fine to me.

jaikiran · 2024-06-04T11:41:24Z

src/java.base/share/classes/java/lang/reflect/MalformedParameterizedTypeException.java

@@ -50,6 +50,8 @@ public MalformedParameterizedTypeException() {
     * Constructs a {@code MalformedParameterizedTypeException} with
     * the given detail message.
     * @param message the detail message; may be {@code null}
+     *
+     * @since 10
     */
    public MalformedParameterizedTypeException(String message) {


Both this and the explicit no-arg constructor were introduced in this class through https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8183175 in Java 10. Since an (implicit) no-arg constructor was always available even before that change, it makes sense to add a @since 10 to only this explicit constructor. This change looks good.

jaikiran · 2024-06-04T11:50:07Z

src/java.base/share/classes/java/nio/MappedByteBuffer.java

@@ -397,6 +397,8 @@ public final MappedByteBuffer rewind() {
     * {@code force()} on the returned buffer, will only act on the sub-range
     * of this buffer that the returned buffer represents, namely
     * {@code [position(),limit())}.
+     *
+     * @since 17
     */
    @Override
    public abstract MappedByteBuffer slice();


This and the other 3 methods on which this @since 17 is being added here were introduced in Java 17, through https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-4833719. Before that change, these methods would have been available on this MappedByteBuffer through the super ByteBuffer class and those methods have been specified to return a ByteBuffer. After that change in JDK-4833719, these methods now return a MappedByteBuffer which is an observable change. So adding @since 17 to these methods looks correct to me.

jaikiran · 2024-06-04T11:53:34Z

src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/Properties.java

@@ -185,6 +185,7 @@ public Properties() {
     *         accommodate this many elements
     * @throws IllegalArgumentException if the initial capacity is less than
     *         zero.
+     * @since 10
     */
    public Properties(int initialCapacity) {


This constructor was introduced in Java 10 through https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8189319, so adding @since 10 here looks correct to me.

jaikiran · 2024-06-04T11:59:19Z

src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/concurrent/ThreadLocalRandom.java

@@ -506,6 +506,8 @@ public float nextFloat() {
     * {@inheritDoc}
     * @throws IllegalArgumentException {@inheritDoc}
     * @implNote {@inheritDoc}
+     *
+     * @since 17
     */
    @Override
    public float nextFloat(float bound) {


These 2 nextFloat(...) methods which take parameters were introduced in Java 17 https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8248862, whereas the no-arg nextFloat() method existed prior to that. So adding @since 17 to these 2 methods looks correct to me.

jaikiran · 2024-06-04T12:05:28Z

src/java.base/share/classes/java/util/zip/Deflater.java

@@ -336,6 +336,8 @@ public void setDictionary(byte[] dictionary) {
     * @param dictionary the dictionary data bytes
     * @see Inflater#inflate
     * @see Inflater#getAdler()
+     *
+     * @since 11
     */
    public void setDictionary(ByteBuffer dictionary) {


This method was introduced in Java 11 through https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-6341887. It appears to be an oversight that a @since 11 wasn't added to this method in that change, because other new methods introduced in that change did come with a @since 11. So this addition of @since 11 now looks fine to me.

jaikiran

These changes look good to me. Thank you Nizar for the work on the @since checker and these PRs in individual areas.

nizarbenalla · 2024-06-04T13:29:52Z

Thanks for the thorough review!

/integrate

nizarbenalla · 2024-06-04T14:44:09Z

/integrate

nizarbenalla · 2024-06-04T16:34:01Z

/integrate

openjdk · 2024-06-04T16:45:43Z

@nizarbenalla
Your change (at version e66fbf5) is now ready to be sponsored by a Committer.

jaikiran · 2024-06-04T16:46:31Z

/sponsor

openjdk · 2024-06-04T16:51:19Z

@nizarbenalla
Your change (at version e66fbf5) is now ready to be sponsored by a Committer.

openjdk · 2024-06-04T16:51:30Z

@nizarbenalla
Your change (at version e66fbf5) is now ready to be sponsored by a Committer.

openjdk · 2024-06-04T16:51:41Z

Going to push as commit e0bab78.
Since your change was applied there have been 294 commits pushed to the master branch:

31f7039: 8316131: runtime/cds/appcds/TestParallelGCWithCDS.java fails with JNI error
4a1cdd5: 8333486: Parallel: Remove unused methods in psParallelCompact
664c993: 8331731: ubsan: relocInfo.cpp:155:30: runtime error: applying non-zero offset to null pointer
8d3de45: 8325168: JShell should support Markdown comments
9ee741d: 8332015: since-checker - Add @ since tags to jdk.httpserver
0f4154a: 8331193: Return references when possible in GrowableArray
64bbae7: 8333394: C2: assert(bol->is_Opaque4() || bol->is_OpaqueInitializedAssertionPredicate()) failed: Opaque node of non-null-check or of Initialized Assertion Predicate
c7495fb: 8333444: Parallel: Inline PSParallelCompact::mark_obj
454660d: 8332900: RISC-V: refactor nativeInst_riscv.cpp and macroAssembler_riscv.cpp
67d6f3c: 8332905: C2 SuperWord: bad AD file, with RotateRightV and first operand not a pack
... and 284 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/5ded8da676d62158d0011086d7f80ff2c9096e13...master

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

openjdk · 2024-06-04T16:51:54Z

@jaikiran @nizarbenalla Pushed as commit e0bab78.

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

nizarbenalla added 2 commits February 29, 2024 10:35

added missing @ since tags to multiple methods and constructors follo…

e782170

…wing bug report JDK-8326951

Merge branch 'openjdk:master' into add-missing-since-tags

f33d30a

bridgekeeper bot added the oca Needs verification of OCA signatory status label Feb 29, 2024

openjdk bot added nio [email protected] core-libs [email protected] labels Feb 29, 2024

nizarbenalla marked this pull request as draft March 11, 2024 15:43

bridgekeeper bot removed the oca Needs verification of OCA signatory status label Mar 11, 2024

nizarbenalla added 2 commits March 15, 2024 11:22

fix PrintStream:write:(byte[]) since tag

cfe4323

fix rest of private/public since tags

2c04a9d

nizarbenalla marked this pull request as ready for review March 15, 2024 11:31

openjdk bot added the rfr Pull request is ready for review label Mar 15, 2024

nizarbenalla marked this pull request as draft March 15, 2024 14:37

openjdk bot removed the rfr Pull request is ready for review label Mar 15, 2024

jaikiran reviewed Mar 16, 2024

View reviewed changes

nizarbenalla added 3 commits March 17, 2024 18:30

removed unnecessary @ since tags

5da3f0d

Revert "removed unnecessary @ since tags"

c21d331

This reverts commit 5da3f0d.

Revert "fix rest of private/public since tags"

ba97724

This reverts commit 2c04a9d.

nizarbenalla marked this pull request as ready for review March 19, 2024 11:20

openjdk bot added the rfr Pull request is ready for review label Mar 19, 2024

nizarbenalla added 4 commits March 19, 2024 15:51

added since tag

3cec63e

Revert "update the copyright year to 2024"

4eaf032

This reverts commit 9ddd230.

nizarbenalla changed the title ~~JDK-8326951 Missing @since Tags~~ JDK-8326951 Missing @since Tags Mar 22, 2024

nizarbenalla added 2 commits May 13, 2024 21:14

Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/master' into add-missing-since…

d3b8e64

…-tags

empty commit and merge

e66fbf5

nizarbenalla changed the title ~~8326951: Missing @since tags~~ 8326951: since-checker - missing @since tags Jun 3, 2024

nizarbenalla changed the title ~~8326951: since-checker - missing @since tags~~ 8326951: since-checker - missing @ since tags Jun 4, 2024

jaikiran reviewed Jun 4, 2024

View reviewed changes

jaikiran approved these changes Jun 4, 2024

View reviewed changes

openjdk bot added the ready Pull request is ready to be integrated label Jun 4, 2024

openjdk bot added the sponsor Pull request is ready to be sponsored label Jun 4, 2024

openjdk bot added the integrated Pull request has been integrated label Jun 4, 2024

openjdk bot closed this Jun 4, 2024

openjdk bot removed ready Pull request is ready to be integrated rfr Pull request is ready for review sponsor Pull request is ready to be sponsored labels Jun 4, 2024

nizarbenalla deleted the add-missing-since-tags branch September 19, 2024 00:33

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

8326951: since-checker - missing @ since tags #18055

8326951: since-checker - missing @ since tags #18055

nizarbenalla commented Feb 29, 2024 •

edited by openjdk bot

Loading

bridgekeeper bot commented Feb 29, 2024

openjdk bot commented Feb 29, 2024

nizarbenalla commented Mar 11, 2024

bridgekeeper bot commented Mar 11, 2024

openjdk bot commented Mar 13, 2024 •

edited

Loading

mlbridge bot commented Mar 15, 2024 •

edited

Loading

jaikiran Mar 16, 2024

nizarbenalla Mar 17, 2024

lahodaj Mar 18, 2024

jaikiran Mar 18, 2024

nizarbenalla commented Jun 4, 2024

jaikiran Jun 4, 2024 •

edited

Loading

jaikiran Jun 4, 2024

jaikiran Jun 4, 2024

jaikiran Jun 4, 2024

jaikiran Jun 4, 2024

jaikiran Jun 4, 2024

jaikiran Jun 4, 2024

jaikiran left a comment

nizarbenalla commented Jun 4, 2024

nizarbenalla commented Jun 4, 2024

nizarbenalla commented Jun 4, 2024

openjdk bot commented Jun 4, 2024

jaikiran commented Jun 4, 2024

openjdk bot commented Jun 4, 2024

openjdk bot commented Jun 4, 2024

openjdk bot commented Jun 4, 2024

openjdk bot commented Jun 4, 2024

8326951: since-checker - missing @ since tags #18055

8326951: since-checker - missing @ since tags #18055

Conversation

nizarbenalla commented Feb 29, 2024 • edited by openjdk bot Loading

Rule 1: Introduction of New Elements

Rule 2: Existing Elements in Subsequent JDK Versions

Rule 3: Handling Missing @since Tags in methods if there is no @since

Progress

Warning

Issue

Reviewers

Reviewing

Webrev

bridgekeeper bot commented Feb 29, 2024

openjdk bot commented Feb 29, 2024

nizarbenalla commented Mar 11, 2024

bridgekeeper bot commented Mar 11, 2024

openjdk bot commented Mar 13, 2024 • edited Loading

mlbridge bot commented Mar 15, 2024 • edited Loading

Webrevs

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

nizarbenalla commented Jun 4, 2024

jaikiran Jun 4, 2024 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jaikiran left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

nizarbenalla commented Jun 4, 2024

nizarbenalla commented Jun 4, 2024

nizarbenalla commented Jun 4, 2024

openjdk bot commented Jun 4, 2024

jaikiran commented Jun 4, 2024

openjdk bot commented Jun 4, 2024

openjdk bot commented Jun 4, 2024

openjdk bot commented Jun 4, 2024

openjdk bot commented Jun 4, 2024

nizarbenalla commented Feb 29, 2024 •

edited by openjdk bot

Loading

Rule 3: Handling Missing `@since` Tags in methods if there is no `@since`

openjdk bot commented Mar 13, 2024 •

edited

Loading

mlbridge bot commented Mar 15, 2024 •

edited

Loading

jaikiran Jun 4, 2024 •

edited

Loading