Tim Ellison wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
Like it or not, Sun's javadoc is the spec. We can get involved in the
EG and help fix the javadoc of course, and we can add additional
commentary about the our interpretation and implementation to
improve it, but we need to ensure that we take
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
Like it or not, Sun's javadoc is the spec. We can get involved in the
EG and help fix the javadoc of course, and we can add additional
commentary about the our interpretation and implementation to
improve it, but we need to ensure that we take reasonable steps to
Tim Ellison wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
Like it or not, Sun's javadoc is the spec. We can get involved in the
EG and help fix the javadoc of course, and we can add additional
commentary about the our interpretation and implementation to
improve it, but we need to ensure that we take
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
Tim Ellison wrote:
snip
Would it help to avoid your confusion if there was a disclaimer in the
generated HTML along the lines that 'this is not a JSE spec'?
Sure - and I think that a link to the spec would help too.
I'm fine with that.
snip
You know what Sunny
It is not clear yet who is going to read that Harmony javadoc?
If it is IDE users only then maybe it is better to write a plug-in that
would show hints from official spec site for java.* methods?
Thanks,
Mikhail
On 2/1/06, Tim Ellison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
Tim
I agree with Mikhail it doesn't sense to write own documentation for
Harmony.
If we implement the J2SE in according to 1.5 specifications it'd be not bad
to link
to the official documentation to avoid any errors and misunderstandings. For
this purpose
new doclet can be implemented as it was done
