RFR: 8338133: Cleanup direct use of `new HtmlTree`

[Jonathan Gibbons]

On Mon, 2 Sep 2024 09:03:09 GMT, Hannes Wallnöfer <hannesw at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Please review an update to "clean up" the direct use of HtmlTree constructors.
>> 
>> Hitherto, many/most instances of `HtmlTree` were created by static factory methods.  This update extends that convention.
>> In most cases, this is by providing either simple no-arg factory methods or commonly used overloads that take an `HtmlId` or `HtmlStyle`.
>> 
>> For some tags, (`br`, `hr`, `wbr`) this allows a singleton instance to be used.
>> For some of the more obscure cases, a more generic `HtmlTree.of(HtmlTag)` method was used.
>> 
>> Notes:
>> * some significant block-level nodes, like `pre`, should probably always set a style, which could be enforced by suitable factory methods. That is currently not the case and could be a future cleanup.
>> * some lists put the same style info on each list item, but might be better placed on the enclosing list. That could be a future cleanup
>
> src/jdk.javadoc/share/classes/jdk/javadoc/internal/html/HtmlTree.java line 389:
> 
>> 387:     }
>> 388: 
>> 389:     private static HtmlTree BR_INSTANCE = unmodifiableTree(HtmlTag.BR);
> 
> There is a failing test in `tools/javac/T8003967/DetectMutableStaticFields.java` because of this and the other new static fields in `HtmlTree.java` not being `final`. The fields should be declared as `final` anyway.

Thanks; I guess that test is not in my standard set of tests for javadoc: mea culpa

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/20778#discussion_r1742458285