Or (c)
/**
* This is the first paragraph.
*
* And this is the second.
*/
and (d)
/**
* This is the first paragraph.
*
* And this is the second.
*/
I tend to use the (c) style, because most of the time the documentation
consists in only one paragraph and I don't like to overload the doc wi
On Sun, 2005-02-06 at 18:59 -0800, Craig McClanahan wrote:
> On Sun, 6 Feb 2005 21:45:08 -0500, Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > My reason is quite a lot simpler than Craig's.
> >
> > I think of as a container tag and not a separator tag, so I never
> > even think of the other way of
On Sun, 6 Feb 2005 21:45:08 -0500, Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My reason is quite a lot simpler than Craig's.
>
> I think of as a container tag and not a separator tag, so I never
> even think of the other way of doing it.
>
> I guess we could do:
>
> /**
> * first
> *
> * se
My reason is quite a lot simpler than Craig's.
I think of as a container tag and not a separator tag, so I never
even think of the other way of doing it.
I guess we could do:
/**
* first
*
* second
*/
and still be XML compliant (assuming an automatic root of some kind),
but it would seem
The standard HTML format is *not* the only output format you can get
with Javadocs -- it is quite feasible to render alternative XML-based
formats that can then be transformed using standard XML technologies
-- but that only works if the markup created by Javadocs comments is
well formed.
In addit
On Sun, 2005-02-06 at 17:18 -0800, Craig McClanahan wrote:
> As should be evident from my own recent practice :-), I'm also +1 on
> the first (XHTML) approach.
Can I ask those supporters of the XHTML style why they prefer it?
Personally I think it:
* increases the text size of the source file
* i
As should be evident from my own recent practice :-), I'm also +1 on
the first (XHTML) approach.
Craig
On Sun, 6 Feb 2005 17:15:48 -0800, Martin Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, 6 Feb 2005 19:46:30 -0500, Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > However, the point of javadoc is to
On Sun, 6 Feb 2005 19:46:30 -0500, Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> However, the point of javadoc is to put it in HTML, and using the
> latest version of HTML (ie XHTML) seems like the thing to do.
>
> Otherwise we could just ignore the 's all together and make it look
> even better for
However, the point of javadoc is to put it in HTML, and using the
latest version of HTML (ie XHTML) seems like the thing to do.
Otherwise we could just ignore the 's all together and make it look
even better for source reading.
+1 to the first :)
Hen
On Mon, 7 Feb 2005 00:03:15 -, Stephen C
[lang] uses the first. [collections] uses the second.
I prefer the second as IMHO it is more readable when you are browsing the
source code. And I definitely read the javadoc in source code form more than
I read it in html form.
Stephen
- Original Message -
From: "Simon Kitching" <[EMAI
Hi All,
I have seen two basic approaches to applying formatting to javadoc text
in source files:
(a) XHTML-style
/**
*This is the first paragraph.
*
*And this is the second.
*/
(b) HTML-style
/**
* This is the first paragraph.
*
* And this is the second.
*/
I would
11 matches
Mail list logo
