cp-tools-discuss
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Cp-tools-discuss] Re: Classpath docs


From: Julian Scheid
Subject: [Cp-tools-discuss] Re: Classpath docs
Date: Mon, 06 May 2002 18:37:49 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.0rc1) Gecko/20020417

Hi Mark,

Mark Wielaard wrote:
I checked in stubs for all java and javax subpackages.
But now that I run gjdoc it seems that it does not like the fact that
there are <title> tags in it. It gives errors like:
"WARNING: Invalid Unicode character 0x0 in javadoc markup has been
stripped" And it prints both the title and the first paragraph of the
package.html. Are my package.html file wrongly constructed?

No, they are not. See
http://java.sun.com/j2se/javadoc/writingdoccomments/index.html#packagecomments
for further details. The stylesheet ought to copy only the <body>
contents, but currently it copies the full file. I'll fix that tonight.

- There are a few typos, like "IlegalArgumentException"
   or "ClassCastExcpetion" which can be easily spotted
   by looking at gjdoc output. I'll see that I fix
   that in CVS when I got some spare time.

I think i fixed most of these now, but I still get some warnings that
seem to come from inner classes where it cannot find some class
referenced through the enclosing class.

Name resolution is one of the biggest issues in gjdoc. It's quiet
possible that there are still problems, especially with inner/outer
classes. I'll take a look at that tonight.
I assume you got the warnings when generating docs for the classpath
tree, so I should be able to reproduce them.

I got a response from RMS and he would like to have the copyright notice
copied from the original java source file. That should be easy for the
GNU Classpath files since they always have the copyright notice at the
top as their second line. In general it would probably be a bit more
difficult.

I thought the copyright notice would always be the same. If it is not,
I'd prefer finding another solution. Having gjdoc expect a certain,
line-based layout is something I'd like to avoid at all cost.
One alternative solution might be to add a @copyright or @license tag
to each class comment. Even if this is redundant, I'd prefer that
because we wouldn't rely on some (WRT javadoc) non-standard text layout.

It seems that it would be most desirable to add the complete boilerplate
we normally use also in the generated files. But since this is 30+ lines
I have asked if we cannot use something smaller.

If RMS insists on this, we could perhaps use a very small font or something.

Seeya

Julian




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]