Allow requirement of javadocs only for interfaces/abstract classes #97

Open
isopov opened this Issue Feb 5, 2014 · 3 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
5 participants
@isopov
Contributor

isopov commented Feb 5, 2014

It is currently possible to setup different javadoc requirements for methods with different visibility - it will be valuable to allow setup such different requirements for abstract methods - maybe even distinguishing abstact methods in interfaces and abstract classe.

@wbingli

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@wbingli

wbingli Apr 7, 2016

+1

wbingli commented Apr 7, 2016

+1

@romani romani added the approved label Apr 7, 2016

@romani

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@romani

romani Apr 7, 2016

Member

I am marking this issue as "approved" as it is NOT related to actual javadoc content parsing (that is already known full of bugs and ... ) and fix could be reliably done base on java parse tree.
Community is welcome to fix this issue.

Member

romani commented Apr 7, 2016

I am marking this issue as "approved" as it is NOT related to actual javadoc content parsing (that is already known full of bugs and ... ) and fix could be reliably done base on java parse tree.
Community is welcome to fix this issue.

@Vladlis

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment Hide comment
@Vladlis

Vladlis Jan 25, 2018

Member

I suggest adding one or more properties to AbstractJavadocCheck which will make it possible to skip something from validation (like non-abstract classes or non-abtract methods) in any Javadoc check which subclasses AbstractJavadocCheck.
But I have a question: what properties do we actually need and how to name them?
The simplest option is a property like validateOnlyAbstract which will skip anything which is:

  • not an interface
  • not an abstract class
  • not a variable located in an interface or an abstract class
  • not a method located in an interface or an abstract class

If we need more option something like JavadocScope could be created with different scopes of validation:

  • ALL
  • ALL_ABSTRACT - to validate only interfaces and abstract classes with all their fields and methods
  • INTERFACE - to validate only interfaces with all their fields and methods
  • something else

@romani @rnveach please share your thoughts

Member

Vladlis commented Jan 25, 2018

I suggest adding one or more properties to AbstractJavadocCheck which will make it possible to skip something from validation (like non-abstract classes or non-abtract methods) in any Javadoc check which subclasses AbstractJavadocCheck.
But I have a question: what properties do we actually need and how to name them?
The simplest option is a property like validateOnlyAbstract which will skip anything which is:

  • not an interface
  • not an abstract class
  • not a variable located in an interface or an abstract class
  • not a method located in an interface or an abstract class

If we need more option something like JavadocScope could be created with different scopes of validation:

  • ALL
  • ALL_ABSTRACT - to validate only interfaces and abstract classes with all their fields and methods
  • INTERFACE - to validate only interfaces with all their fields and methods
  • something else

@romani @rnveach please share your thoughts

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment