harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Zsejki Sorin Miklós <zse...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: javadoc vs. doxygen
Date Fri, 27 Jan 2006 08:19:22 GMT
Doesn't Harmony need Javadoc anyway just in order to be called "Java"?

Sunny Chan wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I am more of a lurker :-) but I have an opinion on this matter.
> 
> If I were to develop a java class library I would stick to Javadoc. 
> Remember, things like Eclipse have support for javadoc embedded source 
> code - so that when you use Eclipse's excellent content assist feature 
> it will display the information about the classes/method/etc. I would be 
> really annoyed if Harmony class library use Doxygen and stop Eclipse 
> content assist from working
> 
> Thanks,
> Sunny
> 
> Andrey Chernyshev wrote:
>> There was a long discussion about writing (or non-writing) the javadoc
>> comments for Java class libraries. I think the another interesting
>> question is: what tools do we use for generating documentation for
>> code at Harmony?
>>
>> Initial class libraries contribution suggested to use the doxygen 
>> system for
>> creating documentation for Java code. Security contribution then
>> suggested an idea of using custom tags for referencing the original
>> J2SE spec.
>>
>> Regardless of whether custom javadoc tags idea is good or bad, I
>> wonder how it could be easily implemented using the doxygen. While the
>> doxygen may seem to be more universal approach because it covers both
>> C/C++ and Java code, I'm not sure if it has an internal API similar to
>> the doclet API supported by the javadoc tool.
>>
>> For example, one can use ALIASES in doxygen configuration to define a
>> custom tag and then expand it to some static text. In the same
>> scenario, javadoc would allow to generate some more sophisticated text
>> depending on the current class, method or whatever other information
>> extracted from the Java source file where the tag was found.
>>
>> Another note is that default javadoc-produced documentation and
>> doxygen-produced documentation have different "look-and-feel".
>>
>> What people think, do we need javadoc for documenting Java sources, or
>> we can always live with the doxygen?
>> If we choose to use javadoc, whether it makes sense to develop our own
>> version of this tool at Harmony?
>>
>>
>> Thank you,
>> Andrey Chernyshev
>> Intel Middleware Products Division
> 
> 

Mime
View raw message