Different interpretation of voids primitivity between QDox and Java reflection

The QDox Type object for java type void returns false for isPrimitive() whereas in java void.class.isPrimitive() is true.

I think Java reflection APIs interpretation of void being a primitive type is weird if not outright wrong. But be that as it may, I think this difference between interpretations of this issue should be mentioned in the javadoc of Type.isPrimitive(). Alternatively Type object for void could return true for isPrimitive() for void to be consistent with Java reflection's interpretation.