[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
21 Sep 2002 16:40:02 +0300
Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3.50
After some useful comments and a bug report by Michael Koch, jdiff.sh
0.0.1 (BETA) now works in the following ways:
* Handles interfaces correctly ... Give me some help here; When you
have a public interface do all the methods-fields default to "public"?
I always explicitly declare them "public", but that's not the case in
eg. java.net.SocketOptions (is that a valid declaration?)
* Extracts the exceptions (from the source code of eg. GNU classpath)
from javadoc comments and _not_ from the methods (or constructors)
signature. Doing the same for the api documentation, makes it
report (correctly?) both checked and unchecked exceptions.
* It still doesn't handle declarations (in .java source) of the type
"type ID", and I did it on purpose because I think declaring it like
this is a bad style as ID is *not* an array of type "type" (like C/C++
arrays,for example), but a *reference* to an array object of type "type".
But If you are *not* in any way willing to declare them as "type ID",
I will fix it ...
* It ignores the "native" keyword from the source code.
* It features even *more* unimaginative variable names :)
TODO: if you have a method that declares eg:
@throws NullPointerException and
@throws IOException. Is not handled correctly if on the manual they
appear in a different order, eg. throws:
IOException blah, blah
NullPointerException blah, blah.
I think I'll fix that some time today... and I'll change the version to 0.0.1
(that is without any greek letter in parentheses :))
Note, that Japitools is more professional and it does the same job. Give it a
try, it has more features than jdiff.sh (which was made to relieve myself from
the tedious work of looking up in the api every single method, not knowing the
existance of Japitools.). I will contribute to Japitools jdiff.sh's html
However I am willing to continue to fix bugs and add futures to jdiff.sh if you
ask me to, as it is neither difficult nor time consuming for me to do so...
PS. You can always find the newest version at
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?
- jdiff.sh (BETA),
Giannis Georgalis <=