Summary: | RFE: ajdoc lite | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Tools] AspectJ | Reporter: | Wes Isberg <wes> |
Component: | IDE | Assignee: | Mik Kersten <mik.kersten> |
Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | QA Contact: | |
Severity: | enhancement | ||
Priority: | P1 | CC: | adrian.colyer |
Version: | 1.1.1 | ||
Target Milestone: | 1.2 | ||
Hardware: | PC | ||
OS: | Windows NT | ||
Whiteboard: |
Description
Wes Isberg
2003-11-13 03:54:40 EST
User feedback at OOPSLA reinforced the importance of ajdoc to me, and I plan on addressing that over the next few weeks. We all thought that we buried that version of ajdoc that generated source files, ran Javadoc over them, then post-processed the generated HTML. But this seemed like the only way to get ajdoc back in the hands of users given our current resources. So I resurrected it, moved it on top of the ASM, and made it work for 1.2-1.4 doclets. By "made it work", I mean that it generates documentation for spacewar and a few other simple systems in its test suite. I implemented the "advises" and "advised by" links, so there is still all the declare stuff to do. But now that all the infrastructure works that should be straightforward. Russell Miles has volunteered (yay!) and I'll help him make that work. A few notes: BUILD George: Could you check that the "ajdoc" module is getting built on the build machine? Also, it's "ajdoc.bat" file should be getting generated in the same way that "ajbrowser.bat" is. Wes: should George grab the script generation stuff from 1.0.x or should we just copy the ajbrowser stuff since its so similar? TESTING We need to run ajdoc on a big system as a part of testing, and make sure that it doesn't fail. Either the JDK or our source tree. Right now I'm pretty sure something will fail when it gets into the corner case of the JDK, but any fixes should be straightforward. How do we do that as a part of the build? It would also be good to run it with 1.2, 1.3, and 1.4 versions of Javadoc underneath. UI RATIONALE I took a quick pass at making the display of crosscutting a bit better. The "Advises" and "Advised by" headings show up in a light-orange cell (keeping with "blue is OO, orange is AO" theme). The shading parallels how Javadoc displays "inherited members"--i.e. things that aren't really in that file, but are links to elsewhere. Instead of a vertical arrangement of "inherited members", the table has a horizontal arrangement to make it different and make better use of h-space. This is great to see. And interesting: generating Java stubs! It seems like this bug should stay open until the work of getting it to product is completed. That means something like: - build works in eclipse for everyone and Ant - [preferred?] put tools.jar in lib/jdk14/tools.jar - or use build variable for tools.jar - doc this in build readme], - build taskdef updated to handle variable for tools.jar - junit uses lib/junit/junit.jar - normal and release build scripts updated as needed [this is a condition for any checkin] - JUnit tests work like the others - AjdocModuleTests in default directory - invoked from run-all-junit-tests - invoked from Ant using tests/junit-modules.xml - tests run ok during normal and release build - rollout script no taskdef? - documented dev-guide doc index? release notes examples/build.xml? list of known limitations, in bug database or in dev-guide - usable: compiler, other errors reported correctly (e.g., if the compiler crashes you get a message saying to send the stack to support@aspectj.org) - (but live with System.out for now) - esp. checking for tools.jar and reporting when unavailable or the wrong version - tested: automated mechanism to - run against all our examples - in JDK 1.3, 1.4 - like you say, run against something big (jdk is too big) - verify the results Thanks for the great task-list Wes. All of these items should now be addressed and ajdoc ready for people to try. |