Bug 135455 - IStackPresentationSite dragStart() Javadoc inconsistent with param name
Summary: IStackPresentationSite dragStart() Javadoc inconsistent with param name
Status: ASSIGNED
Alias: None
Product: Platform
Classification: Eclipse Project
Component: UI (show other bugs)
Version: 3.2   Edit
Hardware: PC Windows XP
: P3 normal (vote)
Target Milestone: ---   Edit
Assignee: Platform UI Triaged CLA
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2006-04-07 02:30 EDT by Alan Green CLA
Modified: 2019-09-06 15:34 EDT (History)
0 users

See Also:

Attachments
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Alan Green CLA 2006-04-07 02:30:18 EDT 
There are two methods in org.eclipse.ui.presentations.IStackPresentationSite named "dragStart". Both have a boolean parameter named "keyboard". The Javadoc for this parameter reads:

     * @param keyboard true iff the drag was initiated via mouse dragging,
     * and false if the drag may be using the keyboard	 

Obviously, the Javadoc is inconsistent with the parameter name. 

From my experience with the API, it appears that parameter name is correct and the Javadoc is right. The Javadoc should read:

     * @param keyboard true if the drag was initiated with the keyboard,
     * and false if it was initiated with the mouse.
Comment 1 Eclipse Webmaster CLA 2019-09-06 15:30:15 EDT 
This bug hasn't had any activity in quite some time. Maybe the problem got resolved, was a duplicate of something else, or became less pressing for some reason - or maybe it's still relevant but just hasn't been looked at yet.

If you have further information on the current state of the bug, please add it. The information can be, for example, that the problem still occurs, that you still want the feature, that more information is needed, or that the bug is (for whatever reason) no longer relevant.
Comment 2 Eclipse Webmaster CLA 2019-09-06 15:34:56 EDT 
This bug hasn't had any activity in quite some time. Maybe the problem got resolved, was a duplicate of something else, or became less pressing for some reason - or maybe it's still relevant but just hasn't been looked at yet.

If you have further information on the current state of the bug, please add it. The information can be, for example, that the problem still occurs, that you still want the feature, that more information is needed, or that the bug is (for whatever reason) no longer relevant.