On 10/6/05, Emmanuel Bourg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thomas Dudziak wrote: > > Btw, I think this check is actually a good idea (including > > @inheritDoc), because it forces the developer(s) to think about > > Javadoc which IMO is quite important for a library developed by > > multiple persons. > > True, but the rule could be twisted to something like "Raise a warning > if the method has no javadoc and it doesn't override a method already > documented in a super class".
Yes, well, but this way even the Javadoc tool will probably raise the warning (didn't try it though), no need for checkstyle. > > And adding an @inheritDoc doesn't cost much time, even if in 200 > > source files, and also has the benefit that it catches (hard-to-find) > > bugs where the base-class method signature was changed but not the one > > of the sub-class method. > > For some reason IntelliJ doesn't like this tag, I don't know for the > other IDEs. Hmm, its a standard tag of Javadoc in at least 1.4.2 and above (http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.4.2/docs/tooldocs/windows/[EMAIL PROTECTED]). Tom --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
