RFR: JDK-8264488: Improve warning for module names ending with digits

[Alex Buckley]

On 5/26/2023 7:36 AM, Sebastian Stenzel wrote:
> On Fri, 26 May 2023 09:00:40 GMT, Alex Buckley
> <alex.buckley at oracle.com> wrote:
> 
>> Ideally, there would be a sibling warning in compiler.properties
>> for when there's only one terminal digit:
>> 
>> terminal digit in module name {0} looks like a version number
> 
> That would be smoother, but since this warning is not end-user-facing
> and its meaning is perfectly clear regardless of cardinality, I would
> argue it doesn't justify the added complexity to count the number of
> digits.

"not end-user-facing"? Isn't this warning emitted by javac to 
potentially any Java developer? That's a lot of developers. Also, the 
text of any javac message guides how the creators of other tools (e.g., 
IDEs) present functionality related to the message (e.g., code hints 
about module names).

One of my colleagues will have to sponsor the PR. I'll leave it to them 
to decide whether a warning in singular form is worthwhile and/or has 
precedent in compiler.properties.

Alex