> Undocumented non-quality code is NOT pragmatic... in fact:
> http://www.pragmaticprogrammer.com/cgi-local/pragprog?FailureHowTo
I like how you imply that the James is undocumented and non-quality just
because an effort is being made to improve the quality and consistency of
the comments.
James' code isn't undocumented, but there are various uncommented members,
so Peter is trying to complete the documentation. The same can be said of
org.apache.poi. For example, AbstractFunctionPtg is missing javadocs for a
number of members.
The wiki you pointed to says "Write no JavaDoc (for instance) or any
documentation whatsoever." It doesn't apply. No one ever said "don't do
documentation."
> Javadoc to me is so basic and takes so little time, to
> actually argue against it...
Are you actually reading these messages, or responding to some imagined
offense? No one has argued against writing javadocs, which is an active,
on-going process. The only issue is whether or not to wait for that process
to finish before we update an old, out-of-date, package with a new package
that fixes bugs in both code and documentation that are causing problems for
people on a daily basis.
> To me this is the same as an argument to write variables a1, a2, a3
This kind of hyperbole suggests that you're really reacting to something
unrelated to anything actually going on here. Some projects from your past,
perhaps.
And, of course, this has nothing to do with end user documentation, such as
telling a user how to install and deploy James. You know, little things
like how to setup a mailing list (have fun reading the docs and FAQ), how
different matchers and mailets interact with each other, or something as
fundamental as the correct documentation for how to setup a database URL
(which is correct in the CVS, and wrong in the current download).
--- Noel
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
