Hi Max, First, I will respect every code style of FOP. Its just a matter of discussion.
> > Really? That means commenting every public method even simple Getters > > and Setters? > > Yes. Simple Getter and Setters are the only place where you can > publicly document private variables. (in most cases, comment in the > getter and link from the setter) Yes thats right. But is this Javadoc better than no Javadoc? public class Person { /** * Returns the first name of this person. * * @returns the first name of this person. */ public String getFirstName() { return firstName; } } > > Commenting equals(), hashCode() and toString()? I think, > > this would be only clutter. > > /** {...@inheritdoc} */ In my eyes this is enough clutter. I saw classes in FOP with maybe 10 methods using this /** {...@inheritdoc} */. It just distracts the eye from ready the actual method name. And it adds absolutely no information for the source code reader. > would do the trick on those, UNLESS they implement something which is > unexpected (such as the equals methods I recently renamed which did > not implement equals) or special (a toString which creates a > guaranteed parsable result for example) Hmmm. A equals method shouldn't do anything unexpected. But your toString() example is a good one. If such standard methods do something more as the comment in Object says, that a comment is useful. I think it's the same as on simple public methods like the getter from above. If your comment doesn't say anything more than the method name says already, I don't want to read it. Best Regards Alex
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part