• Type: Bug
• Component: hotspot
• Sub-Component: compiler
• Affected Version: 9

• Priority: P4
• Status: Resolved
• Resolution: Fixed

• Submitted: 2017-02-24
• Updated: 2019-09-13
• Resolved: 2017-07-04

JDK 9
9Fixed

Thank you Alan for pointing this. Yes, it is fixed: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/hotspot/rev/8346c00b2ba6 04-07-2017 A description was added to this module as part of JDK-8182416 so i think this issue can be closed. 04-07-2017 Yes, JEP 299 is about generating public API documentation, so if you believe a module should not be included in that documentation, it should not be a priority to create such doc comments. 28-02-2017 Jon, thank you for your comments. let me refine my statement, I ain't saying that we should not document that module, I just think not having documentation for jdk.aot module shouldn't be a blocker for JEP 299. if we all agree on that I'd like to defer this bug from jdk 9. 28-02-2017 Note that the link http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jjg/java-javafx-jdk-docs/api/overview-summary.html represents an early demo of consolidation documentation. The set of modules to be documented needs to be refined. 28-02-2017 @Igor, There are two plausible responses to your question. 1. From the point of view of the public documentation, if the module should not be included in any public documentation, then there is no need to provide a javadoc comment. There is a goal to generate unified API docs, (JEP 299), for all the public Java SE, Java FX and JDK API, and that is the driving force behind the desire to see non-empty javadoc comments for the relevant public modules. 2. From a "good software practices" point of view, it could be considered good practice to provide explanatory comments on all high level artifacts, such as modules, packages and types. I'm not suggesting you go all the way to providing detailed comments on all your private fields and methods, although some would say that is good software practice as well. Note that just because we choose to just run javadoc on public modules to generate public documentation does not mean that it is not interesting/useful for folk like developers to be able to generate more fine-grained documentation, such as including all modules, and all packages, and perhaps package-private internal types as well. 28-02-2017 [~jjg] Jon/[~shurailine] Shura, there is no public API provided by jdk.aot module[1], the modules does not export, provide or open anything. the only user of classes from this module is jaotc launcher. Hence I don't think jdk.aot module should be documented in consolidated API documentation. Please let us know your opinion on that. [1] $ cat hotspot/jdk.aot/share/classes/module-info.java ... module jdk.aot { requires jdk.management; requires jdk.internal.vm.ci; requires jdk.internal.vm.compiler; } 28-02-2017 Thank you, Vladimir! Let's wait for JDK-8175845 then. 28-02-2017 jdk.aot is internal module which does not export any Java API. It is used only by experimental (in JDK 9) tool jaotc (AOT compiler). We can add description but nothing else. I would wait when similar JDK-8175845 is Resolved to see what should be done. 27-02-2017 I triaged this issue as a P4. But maybe that assessment needs to be updated if it's crucial to how API documentation for the jdk.aot module in JDK 9. (We're currently allowed to push only P1-P3s, I think). 27-02-2017 The summary of the package seems to be missing as well. If I click on jdk.aot, which points to http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~jjg/java-javafx-jdk-docs/api/jdk.aot-summary.html I get "404 - Not Found". Maybe that issue can be taken care of in the scope of this bug as well. 27-02-2017 Hi Vladimir, could you please assign this issue to somebody on the AOT team (or close/defer it if appropriate). Thank you! Zoltan 27-02-2017 ILW=documentation of experimental jdk.aot module, missing description of jdk.aot module in API doc, no workaround=MLH=P4 27-02-2017