yep, I always think, this kind of allow null not allow null things shall be
marked not by doc, but by annotations.
Xeno Amess <xenoam...@gmail.com> 于2024年10月15日周二 04:10写道：
> 1. important jetbrains annotations as maven dependency.
> 2.add @Nullable in parent class's param
> 3.add @NotNull at child class param
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Gary D. Gregory <ggreg...@apache.org>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 15, 2024 3:29:20 AM
> *To:* dev@commons.apache.org <dev@commons.apache.org>
> *Subject:* [CLI] Javadoc
>
> Hi All,
>
> We now have append methods like:
>
> public interface HelpAppendable extends Appendable {
>
> /**
> * Appends a header.
> *
> * @param level the level of the header. This is equivalent to the
> "1", "2", or "3" in the HTML "h1", "h2", "h3" tags.
> * @param text the text for the header
> * @throws IOException on write failure
> */
> void appendHeader(int level, CharSequence text) throws IOException;
>
> ...
>
> The supertype defines behavior for null input, but here we do not, we
> should either document it as:
> - Same as the super type, same kind of Javadoc
> - Explicitly document that it is up to the implementing class
>
> Thoughts?
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
>
>
