I don't see this as "either/or" but as both.
We need javadoc. Clearly. Every java programmer is used to it, and
tools use it.
That said, we do need documentation beyond what javadoc offers.
Question for d'Oxygen :) nerds.... is it too painful to write regular
docs in it - i.e. independent documents that you might want to augment
the in-code docs?
geir
George Harley1 wrote:
Hi Sunny,
As far as I can tell, Doxygen seems to work just fine with Javadoc-style
comments. So comments could still be written using Javadoc markup (keeping
Eclipse content-assist happy) while leaving the way open for Doxygen to be
the chosen documentation tool for Harmony.
Best regards,
George
________________________________________
George C. Harley
Sunny Chan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
26/01/2006 22:11
Please respond to
harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
To
harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
cc
Subject
Re: javadoc vs. doxygen
Hi all,
I am more of a lurker :-) but I have an opinion on this matter.
If I were to develop a java class library I would stick to Javadoc.
Remember,
things like Eclipse have support for javadoc embedded source code - so
that when
you use Eclipse's excellent content assist feature it will display the
information about the classes/method/etc. I would be really annoyed if
Harmony
class library use Doxygen and stop Eclipse content assist from working
Thanks,
Sunny
Andrey Chernyshev wrote:
There was a long discussion about writing (or non-writing) the javadoc
comments for Java class libraries. I think the another interesting
question is: what tools do we use for generating documentation for
code at Harmony?
Initial class libraries contribution suggested to use the doxygen system
for
creating documentation for Java code. Security contribution then
suggested an idea of using custom tags for referencing the original
J2SE spec.
Regardless of whether custom javadoc tags idea is good or bad, I
wonder how it could be easily implemented using the doxygen. While the
doxygen may seem to be more universal approach because it covers both
C/C++ and Java code, I'm not sure if it has an internal API similar to
the doclet API supported by the javadoc tool.
For example, one can use ALIASES in doxygen configuration to define a
custom tag and then expand it to some static text. In the same
scenario, javadoc would allow to generate some more sophisticated text
depending on the current class, method or whatever other information
extracted from the Java source file where the tag was found.
Another note is that default javadoc-produced documentation and
doxygen-produced documentation have different "look-and-feel".
What people think, do we need javadoc for documenting Java sources, or
we can always live with the doxygen?
If we choose to use javadoc, whether it makes sense to develop our own
version of this tool at Harmony?
Thank you,
Andrey Chernyshev
Intel Middleware Products Division
