It's interesting to note that JavaDoc will propogate comments from an interface
to any classes that implement the interface. This doesn't do us any good in the
case of EJB because our "bean" does not actually implement the home or remote
interfaces. (There are patterns that allow the bean to implement the remote
interface).
jim
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Adena Galinsky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2000 18:07
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: commenting standards
> >
> >
> > Is it standard to duplicate comments in the remote/home
> > interfaces in the
> > bean class? Or should the comments in the interfaces be
> > summary versions of
> > the fuller version in the bean class? Or should the
> > interfaces contain no
> > method specific comments?
> >
>
> Remote and home interface comments are much more important since they will
> be used by the component's clients.
> Implementation comments should document, well, implementation details.
>
> - Avi
> --
> s/\be(\w+)/e-\1/g;
>
> ===========================================================================
> To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
> of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
>
> ===========================================================================
> To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
> of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
>
>
===========================================================================
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
