commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jörg Schaible <>
Subject RE: [configuration] Checkstyle
Date Thu, 06 Oct 2005 16:28:18 GMT
Emmanuel Bourg wrote on Thursday, October 06, 2005 5:58 PM:

> Thomas Dudziak wrote:
>> Btw, I think this check is actually a good idea (including
>> @inheritDoc), because it forces the developer(s) to think about
>> Javadoc which IMO is quite important for a library developed by
>> multiple persons.
> True, but the rule could be twisted to something like "Raise
> a warning
> if the method has no javadoc and it doesn't override a method already
> documented in a super class". 

and at least for Eclipse 3.1 this produces also no longer a java doc warning. Additionally
the javadoc is copied by the javadoc tool in this case anyway (with an appropriate remark)
just like it is done for a plain @inheritDoc annotation.

>> And adding an @inheritDoc doesn't cost much time, even if in 200
>> source files, and also has the benefit that it catches (hard-to-find)
>> bugs where the base-class method signature was changed but not the
>> one of the sub-class method.

Since I removed those from my files they are much more readable. If an interface defines getter
and setters it is really more than superfluous. If the method is overridden and actually *does*
something different, it should have been documented anyway.

- Jörg

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

View raw message