Libin Roman wrote: > Hi, > > As you see I have done javadoc. If you have something specific , > please tell me. > > What function names should I change ? > > please be more specific :) > > > > > Waiting for Answer, > Libin > Roman > Okay....since you asked...
Starting with this class: http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/showattachment.cgi?attach_id=1581 I see no javadoc on the public and protected functions. http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/showattachment.cgi?attach_id=1588 This one actually prompted the message... The method I that prompted the reply was: public int get26Sys (String _s){ -- I will commit the code prior to these kinds of things being fixed, but it can't go in a release of the software until it meets these http://jakarta.apache.org/poi/resolutions/res001.html standards at minimum. If there is a compelling reason for that to be called 26Sys (which doesn't mean much to me). Anyhow, I hate enforcing coding standards hence why we have such minimal ones, but the community has to adopt this code and therefore it kind of needs to meet at least this minimal standard. The method name is my preference but if not then the javadoc needs to adequately explain what it does. It is not an official standard, but I'd really like to see a unit test for this code. If you don't, I certainly well but you're certainly more qualified for that. see src/testcases ... for more information (package is parallel to the class being tested). I realize the rest of the formula package does not reflect those standards, it predates them, is was only there for proof of concept, and will problably be nearly completely rewritten. If you look nearly anywhere else in the src/java directory at any of HSSF of POIFS you'll see the standard followed pretty religiously. -Andy
