ADDITIONAL SYSTEM INFORMATION :
Windows 10
Java 16

A DESCRIPTION OF THE PROBLEM :
Useful thread - https://stackoverflow.com/questions/67010921/

If I attempt to use "javac -Xdoclint:all" on code that contains an optional anonymous class, javac will return a warning, telling me that I am missing a comment for that anonymous optional class. The problem is, there is no possible way to document an optional anonymous class in a way that satisfies javac. It will flag it no matter what.

STEPS TO FOLLOW TO REPRODUCE THE PROBLEM :
1 - On a system with a current Java setup, copy the attached program into a directory.

2 - Compile the program on the commandline with the following command

javac -Xdoclint:all Xdoclint.java

EXPECTED VERSUS ACTUAL BEHAVIOR :
EXPECTED -
The code should compile with no warnings.
ACTUAL -
It compiles with the following error

Xdoclint.java:10: warning: no comment
   A
   ^
1 warning

---------- BEGIN SOURCE ----------
/** Comment. */
public
/** Comment. */
enum
/** Comment. */
Xdoclint
/** Comment. */
{
/** Comment. */
   A
   /** Comment. */
   {
   /** Comment. */
   }
/** Comment. */
   ,
/** Comment. */
   ;
/** Comment. */
}
/** Comment. */
---------- END SOURCE ----------

CUSTOMER SUBMITTED WORKAROUND :
Technically speaking, you can use the following command to bypass this

javac -Xdoclint:all,-missing/private Xdoclint.java

However, this workaround has a few problems.

First off and most importantly, it doesn't solve the problem, it just avoids it.

Second off, it actually hides warnings that should be thrown from a private instance field that is missing a comment. Take the test case code, make a new line after the only semicolon in the test case, then paste the following code into the newly created line "private int a = 0;" Now, compile it with the "workaround", and you will see that it does not report a warning when it should. The line directly above it is a semicolon, not a comment, and therefore, violates javadoc. Therefore, it should throw a warning, but it does not. However, if you redo the same sequence of steps, but use a public int instead of a private one, you will see that it returns the expected error.

Third off, it also hides missing comments for everything contained within the optional anonymous class. Make a new line after the opening curly brace of the optional anonymous class, then paste the following code into the newly created line "public int b = 0;". Then compile it with the workaround and you will see that it does not return a warning when it should.

Point is, this workaround can cause lots of problems, so I hesitate to call it a workaround, but it seems like the best option available.

FREQUENCY : always