Sam and Kevin - Oops... I've already started porting javadoc to a stand alone "javadoc" call. Further, I've found a number of problems with the package name pattern matching stuff.
Who wants this? Or I can do it. (As background: I was getting log4j set up with ant, and I decided to try the javadoc option. So I got sidetracked and spent several hours last night trying to clean up Javadoc.java instead of building wrappers for log4j.) - Paul Philion [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Kevin A Burton wrote: > > > It wouldn't be that hard to add a <javadoc> to Ant... Maybe I will hack > > it this weekend. Does it do anything other than call > > com.sun.tools.javadoc.Main? If so it should run on JDK 1.1 just > > fine.... unless it adds other command line parameters. > > javadoc2 calls com.sun.tools.javadoc.Main, the original javadoc > > A few issues: > > 1) javadoc2 calls com.sun.tools.javadoc.Main. In JDK1.1, javadoc can be > found at sun.tools.javadoc.Main. > > 2) javadoc2 has a lot more parameters than javadoc. In a test version of > the code, I was able to get the javadoc2 taskdef to get into javadoc by > simply omitting the javadoc2 parameters. > > 3) javadoc2 (and presumably javadoc) call System.exit. The original > approach to solving this was to put in a security manager which would > disallow exit calls, but this too is very JDK level specific. Stefano and > I agree that the right fix for this it to convert the code to use > Runtime.exec exec. Sure it is another JVM, but the code will be a lot > cleaner, more portable, and the overhead shouldn't be significant compared > to an entire JavaDoc run. > > I had actually gotten fairly far in addressing these problems (making ample > use of project.getJavaVersion()), but silly me, I wanted to be able to > test it. Since I had broken cocoon in my first attempt to address #3, I > started there. As I said, I was able to get into javadoc, but no files > were being passed as input. Taking a look at the way the build was set up, > the list of generated class files were used as input, so I needed to > compile Cocoon. At that point, Stefano was proposing me as a committer, so > I opted to wait until that was done. > > To make a long story short - let's not both spend the same weekend > duplicating each other's work. If you want it - it is yours, just don't > make the same mistakes I did. If for some reason you can't get to it, let > me know and I will.
