Doesn't seem excessive to me.
Larry
On 6/25/07, Sunburned Surveyor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Larry wrote: "IMO Javadoc comments should be short statements of
> > purpose. They shouldn't talk about algorithms, but should document
> > anything unusual about parameters. For example, Object para
Larry wrote: "IMO Javadoc comments should be short statements of
> purpose. They shouldn't talk about algorithms, but should document
> anything unusual about parameters. For example, Object parameters are
> used in RenderManager methods, but it isn't documented what Objects
> are acceptable."
E
Hi SS,
OK by me. IMO Javadoc comments should be short statements of
purpose. They shouldn't talk about algorithms, but should document
anything unusual about parameters. For example, Object parameters are
used in RenderManager methods, but it isn't documented what Objects
are acceptable.
reg
I'm currently adding Javadoc comments and anylizing methods for unit
testing in my code for OpenJUMP's pluggable rendering system. I have a
question about commits to the OpenJUMP SVN that I wanted to run by you
guys:
Does anyone have a problem with me adding Javadoc comments to public
methods curr
