RFR: 8367530: The exhaustiveness errors could be improved [v16]

[Jan Lahoda]

On Tue, 3 Feb 2026 11:07:40 GMT, Maurizio Cimadamore <mcimadamore at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> These commented-out cases are the ones that are missing from the switch to be exhaustive. I kept them there intentionally, so see what the user might have missed, so that it can be compared with what javac reports. I can add comments to them if desired.
>
> I'm ok with these comments -- I'm a bit less ok with the ones that say "this might be better in this form" -- either we file these case as follow up bugs, or we might as well remove the comments, as I don't think a comment in a test is the best way to track issues/further improvements

I've filled:
https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8377147

for me, the purpose of the comment here is to make the situation clearer for the reader of the test.

Thanks!

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/27256#discussion_r2762826915