http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1357807/diff/1/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/core/ext/Linker.java File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/core/ext/Linker.java (right):
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1357807/diff/1/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/core/ext/Linker.java#newcode155 dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/core/ext/Linker.java:155: * Does this linker support DevMode? I see a warning here for the first line not ending in a period -- please rephrase it so it does. http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1357807/diff/1/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/core/ext/typeinfo/JType.java File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/core/ext/typeinfo/JType.java (right): http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1357807/diff/1/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/core/ext/typeinfo/JType.java#newcode99 dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/core/ext/typeinfo/JType.java:99: * <code>null</code>. I see all these as giving warnings about a missing @return tag. I think that stems from an earlier change of changing "@return foo bar." => "Returns foo bar." to improve the Javadoc format. I guess the only ways to resolve that is either to remove the warning setting for missing @return tag, which means we get lower quality docs in the usual case where there are other tags, or to have both a summary and the @return tag. What do you think? http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1357807/diff/1/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/core/linker/CrossSiteIframeLinker.java File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/core/linker/CrossSiteIframeLinker.java (right): http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1357807/diff/1/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/core/linker/CrossSiteIframeLinker.java#newcode107 dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/core/linker/CrossSiteIframeLinker.java:107: " <set-configuration-property name='xsiframe.failIfScriptTag' value='FALSE'/>";
80 chars
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1357807/diff/1/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/core/linker/CrossSiteIframeLinker.java#newcode160 dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/core/linker/CrossSiteIframeLinker.java:160: * @param context a LinkerContext Can't we go ahead and write more complete Javadoc for these? Also, in this case, shouldn't the above comment be included in the Javadoc as a note for subclasses? http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1357807/diff/1/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/shell/Jsni.java File dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/shell/Jsni.java (right): http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1357807/diff/1/dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/shell/Jsni.java#newcode235 dev/core/src/com/google/gwt/dev/shell/Jsni.java:235: public static String getJavaScriptForHostedMode( Why not add the other @params? I am kind of confused about the criteria for changes -- in other places you add otherwise-empty Javadoc just to add an @param, while here you delete a bad @param and don't add them for parameters that are there. http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1357807/diff/1/user/src/com/google/gwt/autobean/server/impl/TypeUtils.java File user/src/com/google/gwt/autobean/server/impl/TypeUtils.java (right): http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1357807/diff/1/user/src/com/google/gwt/autobean/server/impl/TypeUtils.java#newcode53 user/src/com/google/gwt/autobean/server/impl/TypeUtils.java:53: temp.put(int.class, 0); // already an int I don't think we need the comment. http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1357807/diff/1/user/src/com/google/gwt/autobean/shared/ValueCodex.java File user/src/com/google/gwt/autobean/shared/ValueCodex.java (right): http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1357807/diff/1/user/src/com/google/gwt/autobean/shared/ValueCodex.java#newcode138 user/src/com/google/gwt/autobean/shared/ValueCodex.java:138: return StringQuoter.quote(String.valueOf(value)); Are you sure this is safe? Now, a non-Long object passed in will get stringified rather than throwing CCE. http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1357807/diff/1/user/src/com/google/gwt/i18n/rebind/MessagesMethodCreator.java File user/src/com/google/gwt/i18n/rebind/MessagesMethodCreator.java (right): http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1357807/diff/1/user/src/com/google/gwt/i18n/rebind/MessagesMethodCreator.java#newcode554 user/src/com/google/gwt/i18n/rebind/MessagesMethodCreator.java:554: * @return the count of parameters Don't we normally have a blank line between the summary and the @param/@return/@throws tags? http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1357807/diff/1/user/src/com/google/gwt/requestfactory/shared/RequestTransport.java File user/src/com/google/gwt/requestfactory/shared/RequestTransport.java (right): http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1357807/diff/1/user/src/com/google/gwt/requestfactory/shared/RequestTransport.java#newcode39 user/src/com/google/gwt/requestfactory/shared/RequestTransport.java:39: * @param failure a ServerFailure instance I think if you can't come up with a better description than this, you might as well just have only "@param failure", as it adds nothing. http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1357807/diff/1/user/src/com/google/gwt/validation/client/BaseMessageInterpolator.java File user/src/com/google/gwt/validation/client/BaseMessageInterpolator.java (right): http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1357807/diff/1/user/src/com/google/gwt/validation/client/BaseMessageInterpolator.java#newcode109 user/src/com/google/gwt/validation/client/BaseMessageInterpolator.java:109: * @param locale a GwtLocale instance Again, these descriptions of the parameters are pretty worthless and add nothing over the type signature of the method. http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/1357807/ -- http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
