Fwd: Handling type arguments from outer classes for inner class in javadoc

[-]

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: - <liangchenblue at gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Jan 12, 2021 at 10:22 AM
Subject: Re: Handling type arguments from outer classes for inner class in
javadoc
To: Jonathan Gibbons <jonathan.gibbons at oracle.com>


Hmm, so a question arises:
For example, if we are getting a link for O<T>.I<S>, what should the first
O link to? Should it link to O or should it link to I? and what should the
dot link to, or should it be plain?

When we have static nested classes like Map.Entry, the whole "Map.Entry"
links to the Entry class. We need a designated linking behavior before we
can properly fix this.


liangchenblue at gmail.com

On Fri, Jan 8, 2021 at 10:56 PM - <liangchenblue at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Jon,
> I made a quick patch (attached) that renders the whole inner/nested class
> chains. However, I am not sure if the behavior of the rendered text is
> desired (i.e. clicking before . actually goes to parent class) and the
> patch's side effects; it passes make test-only
> TEST="jtreg:test/langtools/jdk/javadoc/*" though.
>
> liangchenblue at gmail.com
>
> On Fri, Jan 8, 2021 at 12:28 PM Jonathan Gibbons <
> jonathan.gibbons at oracle.com> wrote:
>
>> Filed as
>>
>> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8259499
>>
>> -- Jon
>> On 1/8/21 9:59 AM, - wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>> When I was creating tests for JDK-8259216
>> <https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8259216> (namely this example
>> <https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/1997#issue-551504186>), I
>> encountered another problem, where instance inner class parameterized types
>> (generics) in javadoc omit outer classes' generic information.
>>
>> An example:
>> Tree.java
>> public class Tree<T> {
>>     public class Node {
>>         T data;
>>         Node left;
>>         Node right;
>>         // etc..
>>     }
>>     Node root;
>>     // etc..
>> }
>>
>> User.java
>> public class User {
>>     public void take(Tree<Integer>.Node now, Tree<String>.Node other) {}
>>     public void take(Tree<Integer> now, Tree<String> other) {}
>> }
>>
>> Observe the javadoc method summaries (same for details) are
>> void take(Tree.Node now, Tree.Node other)
>> void take(Tree<java.lang.Integer> now, Tree<java.lang.String> other)
>> while it's the most reasonable from the test code above that both should
>> include the generic information.
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/javadoc-dev/attachments/20210112/f91d4cf3/attachment.htm>