Paul Fisher writes:
> > Have you looked at DOC++ as a JavaDoc replacement? Does it measure up?
> For some reason, I guess the last time I looked at it, it didn't
> support JavaDoc, but it appears to now. The bad news is that it's
> non-free software. The authors make a contradictory statement in that
> they say it's distributed under the GPL, but if you use it
> commercially, you're required to pay them.
> I'll contact them about the discrepancy.
Good luck. I did that two times over the last 18 months
or so. No response whatsoever. Last time I looked it
hadn't moved in 6 months either.
The version I used had a variety of minor bugs,
and the annoyance of having to hack the sources
to get rid off the insanely large DOC++ plug.
I have said this before: the Right Thing to do
is get in touch with the Davenport and SGML-Tools
folks, and aim for a JavaDoc replacement that
works with the DocBook DTD. A few weeks the
SGML-Tools maintainer, Cees de Groot, said he'd
have to work on this for daytime job reasons.
The JDK JavaDoc is a patch of a hack, and worse
than HTML x.x IMO. I'd hate to see somebody wasting
time on writing a drop-in replacement for something
that will hopefully be abandoned.
Note that DOC++ also non-compliant markup ("///").
It also encourages a split between code using LaTeX
markup and code using HTML markup.
b.
