Hi Vincent, > Should the rule be disabled because of that? Having proper javadoc on at > least public methods is very important. OTOH, this is actually not > something Checkstyle can verify. How many methods in the code base have > totally useless comments that are there just to avoid a Checkstyle > warning... > > I think I’d prefer to keep the rule, but wouldn’t veto its removal.
I don't vote for removal too, I only vote for the right to violate it in cases one can't add any useful information in the comment. Best Regards Alex
Description: This is a digitally signed message part