ant-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Matt Harp" <>
Subject RE: Simple XDoclet exmple?
Date Mon, 15 Dec 2003 16:09:36 GMT
I was messing around with it over the weekend to generate documentation on
my source. Through greps and the xdt I figured out a couple things like
@ant.attribute group="required" will make the docs say it's required.
@ant.task ignore="true" will tell the generate to skip that file,
categrory="mycat" groups the html output into subfolders, etc...

So I've been doing a bunch of that and seeing what does what, but all I
could find on examples was the Javac stuff I mentioned which Peter seems to
have confirmed that you have to maintain a seperate xml file for stuff like
that. Can I create a new examples tag and contribute it to the Ant project,
or is that kind of stuff up to the committee? I don't see why I should have
to maintain a seperate xml file when the scripting is already setup to parse
my source file. It would be nice if I could create one huge comment at the
beginning or end (preferable so people don't have to scroll through comments
to find the source code) of my source file and seperate it into sections
with ant tags like ant.example, ant.description, etc...

Also, why is the parser/generator ignoring stuff like @author and @version
tags? Shouldn't it be recognizing these Javadoc tags and including them in
the generated html?



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Erik Hatcher []
> Sent: Monday, December 15, 2003 10:49 AM
> To: Ant Users List
> Subject: Re: Simple XDoclet exmple?
> On Monday, December 15, 2003, at 08:37  AM, Matt Harp wrote:
> > 1. Where is the documentation for the Ant tags for XDoclet? I looked
> > at the
> > .xdt that it uses and all I can seem to find in there is ant.task and
> > ant.attribute. I'm hoping there is a complete listing somewhere for
> > all of
> > the tags.
> Nope, no docs on it other than the .xdt and good ol' grep as Peter
> suggested.
> The main them with the tags is that generally speaking you don't need
> them.  Task names default to the name of the class (lowercased, with
> trailing "Task" removed if it is there).  Setters are exposed as
> attributes and so on with creators/adders as well as the
> DynamicConfigurator being noted in the generated XML as well (I think).
> So at first, see what happens without any tags and see how close it is
> to being accurate.
> 	Erik
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message