[Fwd: Re: [Cp-tools-discuss] bug + possible fix (patch) in texidoclet: TreeNode.java]

[Julian Scheid]

JS wrote:
> As gjdoc doesn't currently deliver exactly the same information as
> javadoc via the Doclet API, this may of course reveal bugs in
> TexiDoclet that go unnoticed when using javadoc.

I failed to mention that it can also introduce problems that are not
caused by bugs in the doclet but by invalid data delivered to the doclet.
So if TexiDoclet runs OK with Javadoc and fails to run with Gjdoc, we
should concentrate on improving Gjdocs conformance to the javadoc spec
(or rather, the Javadoc tool behaviour) instead of hunting "bugs" in
TexiDoclet that don't appear when using Javadoc.

Sometimes however, problems of this kind may reveal a general weakness
of TexiDoclet, like with the problem you encountered. We should of
course use opportunities like this to improve TexiDoclet code so that
it is better prepared for unusual situations and thus more stable.

But in general, if you encounter a similar problem the next time,
please try to find out how Gjdoc 'API output' (i.e. the return values
of the various Doclet API methods) deviates from Javadoc output
so that we can fix the problem on the Gjdoc side.

DebugDoclet will be a great help with this once finished.

Julian