RFR: JDK-8298405: Support Markdown in Documentation Comments [v6]

[Jonathan Gibbons]

On Fri, 12 Jan 2024 15:55:43 GMT, Pavel Rappo <prappo at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Jonathan Gibbons has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains seven additional commits since the last revision:
>> 
>>  - Merge with upstream/master
>>  - Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/master' into 8298405.doclet-markdown-v3
>>  - Address review comments
>>  - Fix whitespace
>>  - Improve handling of embedded inline taglets
>>  - Customize support for Markdown headings
>>  - JDK-8298405: Support Markdown in Documentation Comments
>
> src/jdk.compiler/share/classes/com/sun/source/doctree/RawTextTree.java line 40:
> 
>> 38:  * @apiNote
>> 39:  * This class may be used to represent tree nodes containing
>> 40:  * {@linkplain DocTree.Kind#MARKDOWN Markdown} text.
> 
> This means that there is one-to-many relationship between `RawTextTree` and `DocTree.KIND`. This in turn perpetuates the pattern of checking the kind followed by casting as opposed to more modern `instanceof` pattern matching. There's nothing wrong with it per se, however I wonder what the rationale is for leaving this part of the API open-ended. Is it to support other types of raw text in the future?

Yes, the thinking was to allow it to be open-ended.

In this case, while I think we should specify the ability to use `instanceof`-style checks with this API, I do not think it would be necessary ... there is no need for a subtype for `MarkdownTree`, nor would I expect there to be one for any other kind of raw text.

> src/jdk.compiler/share/classes/com/sun/tools/javac/parser/DocCommentParser.java line 89:
> 
>> 87:         POSTAMBLE,
>> 88:         /** The rich-text content of an inline documentation comment tag. */
>> 89:         INLINE
> 
> Do we also need to say something about `.md` files here?

Probably, yes.

-------------

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16388#discussion_r1454249356
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/16388#discussion_r1454250904