Hi!
Michael McCallum wrote:
>There was dicussion of this a while ago. Cant remember what the result was.
>
Yeah, I found it. It was agreed it was a mistype.
>
>
>Will get all of the recent patches together this week.
>
>Have a little bit more time on my hands now.
>
>I think if the javadoc and the code do not match the best approach is to patch the
>javadoc.
>
I would agree. The code can be left this way as long as it works but the
JavaDoc should state this "peculiarity". A problem may arise when using
an IDE with code completion. It will show "substring(int offset, int
length)" and I (and probably most of those who don't use RegExp every
day) will think the "length" parameter is really a length. Therefore, I
think it is better to patch the code.
Anyway, this doesn't exclude the need for more informative JavaDoc.
>
>
>If you think the javadoc shows a better solution/ ore correct implementation start a
>discussion
>with your reasons.
>
Right now, the JavaDoc
/** @return a substring */
does not show anything useful, does it? ;-)
Cheers,
Chavdar
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
