On Fri, 2 May 2014 00:56:43 +0200, Bernd Eckenfels wrote:
Am Fri, 02 May 2014 00:49:53 +0200
schrieb Gilles <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org>:
In a context where people are fairly likely write documentation
referring to generics, it's quite short-sighted to impose rules that
lead to e.g. "List<String>"
IMO, that counts as _not_ readable.
You can use {@literal List<String>} which is a bit more readable. In
your case, you would probably use {@code List<String>} which also
does
escaping on its own.
It is the answer to the question I've just asked in another post.
It's a relief that it's still supported (in Java 8).
This syntax is (IMO) much, much, nicer than entities.
Hence, to come back to the issue of consistency and good practice,
mentioned to in an earlier post: this notation should be preferred,
because it is what most of the CM project's Javadoc already uses.
Gilles
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
