ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Paul Philion <phil...@acmerocket.com>
Subject Re: Ant & Javadoc, jdk specific?
Date Tue, 18 Jan 2000 20:10:57 GMT
Sam and Kevin -

Oops... I've already started porting javadoc to a stand alone "javadoc"
call. Further, I've found a number of problems with the package name
pattern matching stuff.

Who wants this? Or I can do it.

(As background: I was getting log4j set up with ant, and I decided to
try the javadoc option. So I got sidetracked and spent several hours
last night trying to clean up Javadoc.java instead of building wrappers
for log4j.)

- Paul Philion

rubys@us.ibm.com wrote:
> 
> Kevin A Burton wrote:
> 
> > It wouldn't be that hard to add a <javadoc> to Ant... Maybe I will hack
> > it this weekend.  Does it do anything other than call
> > com.sun.tools.javadoc.Main?  If so it should run on JDK 1.1 just
> > fine.... unless it adds other command line parameters.
> 
> javadoc2 calls com.sun.tools.javadoc.Main,  the original javadoc
> 
> A few issues:
> 
> 1) javadoc2 calls com.sun.tools.javadoc.Main.  In JDK1.1, javadoc can be
> found at sun.tools.javadoc.Main.
> 
> 2) javadoc2 has a lot more parameters than javadoc.  In a test version of
> the code, I was able to get the javadoc2 taskdef to get into javadoc by
> simply omitting the javadoc2 parameters.
> 
> 3) javadoc2 (and presumably javadoc) call System.exit.  The original
> approach to solving this was to put in a security manager which would
> disallow exit calls, but this too is very JDK level specific.  Stefano and
> I agree that the right fix for this it to convert the code to use
> Runtime.exec exec.  Sure it is another JVM, but the code will be a lot
> cleaner, more portable, and the overhead shouldn't be significant compared
> to an entire JavaDoc run.
> 
> I had actually gotten fairly far in addressing these problems (making ample
> use of  project.getJavaVersion()), but silly me, I wanted to be able to
> test it.  Since I had broken cocoon in my first attempt to address #3, I
> started there.  As I said, I was able to get into javadoc, but no files
> were being passed as input.  Taking a look at the way the build was set up,
> the list of generated class files were used as input, so I needed to
> compile Cocoon.  At that point, Stefano was proposing me as a committer, so
> I opted to wait until that was done.
> 
> To make a long story short - let's not both spend the same weekend
> duplicating each other's work.  If you want it - it is yours, just don't
> make the same mistakes I did.  If for some reason you can't get to it, let
> me know and I will.

Mime
View raw message