broken links detection just looks for broken links. thats why there is no argument about whether the failure is "true" or "false". it doesnt know fairness and justice. it only knows filenotfoundexception.
On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 8:40 AM, Shai Erera <[email protected]> wrote: > I guess you didn't read past that comment :). I wrote that I don't know how > documentation-lint works and whether it broke on the method signature or the > {@link}. > > Shai > > > On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 3:38 PM, Robert Muir <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 7:54 AM, Shai Erera <[email protected]> wrote: >> > bq. How can it not be a true error?! >> > >> > If you @link to a package-private class in a javadoc, it DOES NOT create >> > a >> > link, but rather just writes the plain class's name. In fact, the result >> > of >> > {@link PackagePrivateClass} is the same as {@code PackagePrivateClass}. >> > At >> > least, I ran 'ant javadocs' and viewed the HTML, and the result was like >> > the >> > latter. >> >> Dude: if it didn't create a link, you wouldnt have gotten a broken >> links failures. >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
