RFR [15] 8238291: Fix inconsistencies in the format of the index files

[Pavel Rappo]

> On 3 Feb 2020, at 19:58, Jonathan Gibbons <jonathan.gibbons at oracle.com> wrote:
> 
> Approved, but for bonus points, add a comment to SearchIndexItem.toString
> listing all the letters we use and what they are used for.

If it's okay I'd prefer not to do that. That method is pretty self-describing
and is not a part of public API. However, I'd agree that it is not obvious that
its output is not for debugging or otherwise human consumption, but for later
parsing. The should be a separate method, really.

> For further consideration (later?), could we have a worker method that takes a varargs list of pairs, perhaps similar to Map.of, or even using Map.of?  Or use a builder object with methods named for the single-characters whose arg is the value ... although the conditional get in the way of fluent API usage.

This definitely makes sense. I dislike the fact that it is a simple POJO, prone
to all sort of internal conflicts and inconsistencies. Should be addressed in a
follow-up bug.

This should be cleaned up further. Perhaps, an appropriate time would be right
after JDK-8235827: Improve the System Properties page.

> Separately, (later?) what if the description contains a quote character ('"') ... there is no attempt to escape any values.

Thanks! I've filed a bug on that, JDK-8238495, and added a corresponding 
TODO comment to the code.

-Pavel

> -- Jon
> 
> 
> On 01/31/2020 05:47 AM, Pavel Rappo wrote:
>> Hello,
>> 
>> Please review the change for https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8238291:
>> 
>>   http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~prappo/8238291/webrev.00/
>> 
>> This is a tiny cleanup change. The goal is to fix inconsistency in abbreviating
>> the fields of the index structure.
>> 
>> The fields of the index structure, such as "label", "containingModule",
>> "containingPackage", "containingClass", "holder", and "description" are
>> abbreviated in the index files to a single letter, "l", "m", "p", "c", "h", and
>> "d" respectively. The "url" field is not. Sometimes it is referred to as "u",
>> other times as "url".
>> 
>> From my archival research it seems that this peculiarity has been there from day 1.
>> While "url" was used for indexing packages, types, members, and then modules,
>> "u" was used for everything else, which back then comprised the "search tags"
>> category. I couldn't find any evidence of that being done for some purpose.
>> I do believe it's just a typo, thus I propose to fix it.
>> 
>> Incidentally, this change reduces the size of the index files. In case you
>> wonder the reduction is 1% (one percent), otherwise known as "not something to
>> brag about".
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> -Pavel
>> 
>