RFR: 8325088: Overloads that differ in type parameters may be lost

Chen Liang liach at openjdk.org
Wed Mar 27 21:59:33 UTC 2024


On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:19:35 GMT, Pavel Rappo <prappo at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Creating a link to a constructor or a method or comparing constructors or methods __does not__ factor in type parameters. When constructors or methods are overloaded and differ only in type parameters -- a situation which is absent in JDK API, but present elsewhere -- that causes significant defects, such as:
> 
>   - missing entries in summary tables, lists and indexes,
>   - duplicating links in the table of contents.
> 
> This PR fixes those defects, and the fix is two-fold. Firstly, we update comparators to consider type parameters. That takes care of missing constructors and methods. Secondly, we update id (anchor) and link generation to always use the "erased" notation. That takes care of duplicating links.
> 
> What's the "erased" notation? Suppose we have the following method:
> 
>     <T extends String> T m(T arg)
> 
> The current notation refers to it as `m(T)`. That works fine until there's no other method, such as
> 
>     <T> T m(T arg)
> 
> In which case, the current notation will produce a collision: `m(T)`. By contrast, the erased notation for those two methods is `m(java.lang.String)` and `m(java.lang.Object)` respectively. No collision.
> 
> While longer, I believe that the erased notation is collision-proof. Why? Because [JLS 8.4.2][] says that "it is a compile-time error to declare two methods with override-equivalent signatures in a class". Which means that for any two constructors or methods the erasure of their signatures must differ, or else it won't compile.
> 
> The change is pretty straightforward, except for some test fallout that required attention.
> 
> [JLS 8.4.2]: https://docs.oracle.com/javase/specs/jls/se22/html/jls-8.html#jls-8.4.2

A compatibility problem is that if library C wants to link to library A on Java 17 with generic anchors and library B on 23 with erased anchors. Is there a way for Javadoc to generate the correct link to both older versions, such as by detecting which anchor format was used by scanning index.html?

A similar problem occured before when Javadoc changed `--` around method parameters to `()`.

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/18519#issuecomment-2024059820


More information about the javadoc-dev mailing list