Hi,
for example
for the method newClientPooledConnection the following is the comment I
put which explains actually the purpose of the function.
/**
* This method is used to return an instance of
* ClientPooledConnection (or ClientPooledConnection40) class which
* implements javax.sql.PooledConnection
*/
I guess the problem is here because I add a description in the interface
generic to what the implementation will be doing which wrong!
I should probably be saying here that the method returns an instance of
the javax.sql.PooledConnection interface
and in
ClientJDBCObjectFactoryImpl say
it returns an instance of ClientPooledConnection
and in
ClientJDBCObjectFactoryImpl40 say
it returns an instance of ClientPooledConnection40
Is this what you had in mind too?
Narayanan
Oystein Grovlen - Sun Norway wrote On 02/17/06 20:23,:
V.Narayanan (JIRA) wrote:
--> In this specific case I did'nt put in method level javadoc
comments for the Impl classes because they inherit the javadoc
comments of the interface. If you still feel that they need class
level comments I will add these too.
There is a lot of examples in Derby where the Javadoc for a class is
just copied from an interface. I do NOT think this is OK. I think
one should also describe what is particular to this implementation of
the interface.
