Javadoc conventions in the presence of default methods
Stephen Colebourne
scolebourne at joda.org
Fri Feb 1 07:36:57 PST 2013
Thanks for the thread. I mostly agree.
On 1 February 2013 02:31, Brian Goetz <brian.goetz at oracle.com> wrote:
> We've tried this thread a few times without success, so let's try it again.
Should this be beyond Project Lambda EG?
> There are lots of things we might want to document about a method in an API.
> Historically we've framed them as either being "specification" (e.g.,
> necessary postconditions) or "implementation notes" (e.g., hints that give
> the user an idea what's going on under the hood.) But really, there are
> four boxes (and we've been cramming them into two):
>
> { API, implementation } x { specification, notes }
What about the difference betwen what implementors of "Java SE" need
to do vs subclass writers?
I'm guessing you intend both to be @implspec, but is that enough?
thanks
Stephen
More information about the lambda-libs-spec-observers
mailing list