Please Review javadoc fixes 8026982 (updated)

[Mandy Chung]

On 10/22/13 2:06 PM, roger riggs wrote:
> Hi Mandy,
>
> On 10/22/2013 5:01 PM, Mandy Chung wrote:
>> The <p><pre><code>.....</code></pre><p>
>> is updated to <pre>{@code ...}</pre> that should simply be:
>>     {@code ...}
>
> the {@code ...} does not imply preformatted.  So for a multi-line or 
> separate line example the <pre> is still needed.

That's true.  I was assuming that the author wants one (@code) or the 
other (preformatted) but not both.  It's out of the scope of this fix 
and your patch looks fine.
>>
>> I notice that there are few ending <p> not removed in this
>> updated patch. One example:
>>
>> -     * <p><pre><code>
>> -     * (byte)(0xff & (v >> 8))
>> -     * (byte)(0xff & v)
>> -     * </code></pre><p>
>> +     * <pre>{@code
>> +     * (byte)(0xff & (v >> 8))
>> +     * (byte)(0xff & v)
>> +     * }</pre><p>
> This <p> is the start of the next paragraph; perhaps it should be on a 
> new line;
> (javadoc -Xlint did not complain about it).
>

I see. thanks
Mandy

> Thanks, Roger
>
>>
>> Mandy
>>
>>>
>>> On 10/22/2013 04:31 PM, roger riggs wrote:
>>>> Thanks for the comments, updated with Webrev with the suggestions.
>>>>
>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rriggs/webrev-javadoc-8026982/
>>>>
>>>> Roger
>>>>
>>>> On 10/22/2013 2:53 PM, roger riggs wrote:
>>>>> Please review more javadoc cleanup to satisfy javadoc -Xlint.
>>>>> The changes remove <p> markup where it is invalid or unnecessary
>>>>> in packages java. io, lang, net, nio, rmi, security, text, and util.
>>>>> (this is a relatively low priority cleanup).
>>>>>
>>>>> Webrev:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~rriggs/webrev-javadoc-8026982/
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks, Roger
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>