Re: RFR: JDK-8257925 enable more support for nested inline tags [v2]

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
1 message Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RFR: JDK-8257925 enable more support for nested inline tags [v2]

Hannes Wallnöfer
On Fri, 5 Feb 2021 04:44:07 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons <[hidden email]> wrote:

>> Please review an update to improve the support, where appropriate, for nested inline tags.
>>
>> It has always been the case that certain inline tags allow text and HTML to appear within them. With tags like `{@return}` and `{@summary}` it becomes desirable to also generally allow nested inline tags to appear in those places as well. The work for this was started with the support for `{@return}` [JDK-8075778](https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8075778), but applying the work more generally was out of scope at the time. This change completes the work that was started then.
>>
>> The work can be grouped into 4 parts, in 3 commits.
>>
>> ## Commit 1
>>
>> * Update `DocCommentParser` to syntactically allow nested inline tags in situations that permit text and HTML
>> * Update the downstream code to semantically limit nestg where it does not make sense, and provide new tests to verify the behavior.
>>
>> A family of new tests are added, each testing the ability to put an inline tag within another of the same kind, with and without doclint being enabled. In addition, test cases are added placing a simple instance `{@value}` in an enclosing tag: this is a useful case just because the expansion is plain text and therefore valid in all situations.  Additional tests and test cases can be added as needed.
>>
>> This commit left the `{@index}` tag generating "bad" code when it was nested. The error was "reference to an undeclared ID". The (temporary) solution was to disable the automatic link checking for this specific subtest.
>>
>> ## Commit 2
>>
>> * `HtmlDocletWriter` and `TagletWriterImpl ` pass around a pair of booleans `isFirstSentence` and `inSummary` to help determine the output to be generated. Conceptually, a third value is added to that group: a set containing the set of nested tag kinds, so that it is possible to determine the enclosing tags for a tag.  But, rather than add a third parameter to be passed around, the 3 are grouped into a new class `TagletWriterImpl.Context` which encapsulates the two booleans and the new set.  The new class is added in a way to minimize code churn.  No tests are affected by this change: all continue to pass.
>>
>> ## Commit 3
>>
>> * The new `Context#inTags` field is used to help improve the behavior of nested `{@index}` tags even when used incorrectly, with warnings disabled.  As a result, the temporary change in the first commit to disable automatic link checking in one of the test cases is reverted.
>>
>> <hr>
>>
>> The introduction of the new Context class is arguably more general than we need at this time, but it clears up some erratic and inconsistent use of the `isFirstSentence` and `inSummary` booleans. The new class also provides a better framework for any complex new inline tags we may add in future. We might want to change the `Set<DocTree.Kind>` to some other collection at some point, if needs be (a stack, for example.) We might also want to move more information into the `Context`, such as the related `Element` that is otherwise ubiquitously passed around.
>>
>> The overall cleanup also revealed some latent bugs in the code, that were hidden in some of the tests. Most notable was that there were still some cases were `<` and `>` were not being correctly escaped as `&lt;` and `&gt;` leading to output in some tests of the form `List<String>` !  This triggered a minor cleanup/rewrite of the beginning of `HtmlDocletWriter.seeTagsToContent` which was previously a bit too liberal with the use of `new RawHtml`!  The other minor cleanup was more consistent handling of whitespace at the end of the first sentence, as will be seen in a couple of places in one of the tests that was updated.
>
> Jonathan Gibbons has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
>
>   improve handling of nested links

That's a very nice improvement! I have added a few comments and suggestions, but nothing of major importance.

src/jdk.javadoc/share/classes/jdk/javadoc/internal/doclets/formats/html/HtmlDocletWriter.java line 1082:

> 1080:                     default -> {
> 1081:                         assert false;
> 1082:                         return HtmlTree.EMPTY;

What is the reason to `assert false` here and in other places instead of, say, always throw a RuntimeException?

src/jdk.javadoc/share/classes/jdk/javadoc/internal/doclets/formats/html/HtmlDocletWriter.java line 1615:

> 1613:                         if (label.isEmpty()) {
> 1614:                             label = new StringContent(node.getReference().getSignature());
> 1615:                         }

That's quite a bit of work for something probably very few people should try...

src/jdk.javadoc/share/classes/jdk/javadoc/internal/doclets/formats/html/HtmlDocletWriter.java line 1637:

> 1635:                 public Boolean visitSee(SeeTree node, Content c) {
> 1636:                     // we need to pass the DocTreeImpl here, so ignore node
> 1637:                     result.add(seeTagToContent(element, tag, context));

Is above comment still correct? Aren't `tag` and `node` the same object?

src/jdk.javadoc/share/classes/jdk/javadoc/internal/doclets/formats/html/TagletWriterImpl.java line 165:

> 163:      */
> 164:     public TagletWriterImpl(HtmlDocletWriter htmlWriter, boolean isFirstSentence, boolean inSummary) {
> 165:         super(isFirstSentence);

To avoid almost identical constructors this one could be implemented as

    this(htmlWriter, new Context(isFirstSentence, inSummary));

test/langtools/jdk/javadoc/doclet/testNestedInlineTags/TestNestedLinkTag.java line 108:

> 106:                 "ABC <a href=\"#m2()\"");
> 107:         checkOutput("p/C.html", true,
> 108:                 "ABC DEF GHI");

Since you are running this with and without doclint, should this or any test in this file check for doclint warnings?

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

Marked as reviewed by hannesw (Reviewer).

PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/2369