RFR: 8214126: Method signatures not formatted correctly in browser

[Hannes Wallnöfer]

I was thinking about doing it the way you suggest, and I went ahead and did it. 

New webrev with „fluent“ builder, no other changes:

http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~hannesw/8214126/webrev.05/

Hannes



> Am 04.06.2019 um 00:14 schrieb Jonathan Gibbons <jonathan.gibbons at oracle.com>:
> 
> Much nicer.
> 
> I'll offer one additional suggestion for your consideration; it is up to you whether to take it or push as-is.
> 
> Other low-level builders in javadoc support fluent usage by having a return type of itself instead of void, and ending each method with "return this;"
> 
> This, for example, the following:
> 
>  154         MemberSignature sig = new MemberSignature(constructor);
>  155         sig.addParameters(getParameters(constructor, true));
>  156         sig.addExceptions(getExceptions(constructor));
>  157         return sig.toContent();
> 
> could be simplified to:
>  154         return new MemberSignature(constructor);
>  155                 .addParameters(getParameters(constructor, true));
>  156                 .addExceptions(getExceptions(constructor));
>  157                 .toContent();
> -- Jon
> 
> 
> On 06/03/2019 09:21 AM, Hannes Wallnöfer wrote:
>> I uploaded a new webrev with MemberSignature converted to a builder class: 
>> 
>> 
>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~hannesw/8214126/webrev.04/
>> 
>> 
>> Hannes
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> Am 28.05.2019 um 20:07 schrieb Jonathan Gibbons <jonathan.gibbons at oracle.com>
>>> :
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 05/28/2019 10:59 AM, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On 05/28/2019 07:04 AM, Hannes Wallnöfer wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>>  From an implementation side, I created a new HtmlTree subclass called MemberSignatureTree as an inner class of AbstractMemberWriter that implements the display policies listed above. It is used by all member signature writers, simplifying the #getSignature methods in various MemberWriter classes quite a bit.
>>>>> 
>>>> Just from reading the description in this sentence, and without looking at the code yet, the style for such objects is to make them be "builder" objects ... not inheriting HtmlTree but having a "toContent" method that generates the tree when all the relevant information has been provided via set/add/put methods.
>>>> 
>>>> It makes sense to use a shared object to simplify the signature writes, but it doesn't sound right for it to be a subtype of HtmlTree, which is generally supposed to be a low level element that just has a tag, attributes and content.
>>>> 
>>>> -- Jon
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> For examples of existing builder-style classes, see Head, Table, TableHeader.
>>> 
>>> By deferring the construction of the HtmlTree, you can relax the order in which the configuration methods are called, and can wait to make decisions about the generated HTML until you have total knowledge of all the component parts.
>>> 
>>> -- Jon
>>> 
>