<i18n dev> RFR: 8276348: Use blessed modifier order in java.base

[Mark Sheppard]

On Tue, 2 Nov 2021 18:17:36 GMT, Pavel Rappo <prappo at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> It's tough when a natural language clashes with a programming language. I appreciate that this particular clash might cause discomfort to native English speakers. (This reminds me of that _DOSASCOMP_ mnemonic for adjective order.) That said, consider the following pragmatic aspect. Unless we change the script not to process prose in comments (btw, how would we do that?), every single time we run that script, that particular line in Object.java will need to be tracked and excluded.
>
> Here's a bit of archaeology. I found the original JDK-8136583 patch, which has moved from where it was in the RFR to https://cr.openjdk.java.net/~martin/webrevs/jdk9/blessed-modifier-order/. That patch doesn't change Object.java. The RFR thread mentions neither that javadoc change nor any javadoc change for that matter. So either the script was different, or Martin filtered that line (from Object.java) out before creating the webrev.  
> 
> Now, in his followup thread on core-libs-dev, http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/2015-September/035273.html, Martin specifically pointed out javadoc changes and said that they seem fine to him.

"to each his own". I think static synchronized reads best and more natural  than synchronzied static. Also from a semantic point of view as it conveys class level characteristic thus lends static to having a prominence in specified order.

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

PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/6213