JDK-4421066 : Doclet API: Generics versus javadoc and the doclet API
  • Type: Bug
  • Component: tools
  • Sub-Component: javadoc(tool)
  • Affected Version: 5.0
  • Priority: P4
  • Status: Resolved
  • Resolution: Fixed
  • OS: solaris_7
  • CPU: generic
  • Submitted: 2001-03-02
  • Updated: 2017-05-16
  • Resolved: 2003-08-30
The Version table provides details related to the release that this issue/RFE will be addressed.

Unresolved : Release in which this issue/RFE will be addressed.
Resolved: Release in which this issue/RFE has been resolved.
Fixed : Release in which this issue/RFE has been fixed. The release containing this fix may be available for download as an Early Access Release or a General Availability Release.

To download the current JDK release, click here.
5.0 tigerFixed
Related Reports
Relates :  
Relates :  
Relates :  
        Note that because javadoc has an exclusively source level 
        perspective, javadoc will be broken if generic support does
        not roll out with generics.

        Impact on Doclet API
                Two new sub-interfaces of Type will need to be added.
                Their exactly structure will need to be carefully
                considered so that existing doclets "fail" as gently
                as possible.  Several other methods will need to be
                added to MethodDoc, ClassDoc, Type, ...
                See discussion of class definition vs class use, at 
                the bottom.

        Impact on Doclet API implementation (aka javadoc tool)
                This requires that:
                * we complete (or re-implement) the Doclet API 
                  implementation on the new compiler.
                * we extend it with the new API functionality.

        Impact on Standard Doclet
                This change will have some impact on just about every 
                corner of the Standard Doclet.

CONVERTED DATA BugTraq+ Release Management Values COMMIT TO FIX: tiger FIXED IN: tiger INTEGRATED IN: tiger tiger-b18

EVALUATION Yes, this is absolutely true. gilad.bracha@eng 2001-03-02 I don't think the impact is as earth-shattering as this description implies. neal.gafter@Eng 2001-03-19 Note there is a difficult issue in generifying the documents: what syntax will be used to indicate generic parameters? If we use the obvious source-level syntax in the documents <I> that will look like an HTML tag and turn everything italic. On the other hand, if we use the obvious HTML syntax &lt;I&gt; then our users will wail and moan. Perhaps we need to invent a compromise just for javadoc - such as an embedded tag @tparam(I) Then Map<K,Map.Entry<K,V>> will be written Map@tparam(K,Map.Entry@tparam(K,V)) Alternately, perhaps we should stop trying to directly support HTML. ###@###.### 2003-03-23