Re: BUG in VB.NET XML comment engine?
- From: "Jay B. Harlow [MVP - Outlook]" <Jay_Harlow_MVP@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2005 09:15:37 -0600
Kevin,
| I didn't say it was... What I was trying to point out is that the VB
| behaviour is specifically excluded by the C# spec; The C# team couldn't
| introduce it without a breaking change...
I hope you agree with my point all along that the behaviour is no
specifically included by the C# spec either.
| Not much room for ambiguity there! Even if the tag is semantically wrong,
C#
| must pass it :-)
Obviously we will need to agree to disagree.
--
Hope this helps
Jay [MVP - Outlook]
..NET Application Architect, Enthusiast, & Evangelist
T.S. Bradley - http://www.tsbradley.net
"Kevin Downs" <msnewsATNOSPAMkdownsDOTcom> wrote in message
news:uEYCkgY9FHA.636@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|
| >> I would agree that the VB behaviour is probably more logical, but this
| >> does not mean that C# is wrong...
| > I didn't say one is right & one is wrong, I stated one seems "correct"'
| > and one seems "incorrect", (NOTE the quotes & the word seems). In other
| > words its subjective! Is the glass half empty or half full?
|
| I agree whole-heartedly.
|
| >
| >> According to the 'official' source (Ecma C# 2.0 spec, Annex E), Also
the
| >> specification states "The documentation generator must accept and
| > Ah! There's the rub!
| >
| > We are quoting the C# spec in reference to VB!
| >
| > Repeat after me: VB is *NOT* C#. ;-)
|
| I didn't say it was... What I was trying to point out is that the VB
| behaviour is specifically excluded by the C# spec; The C# team couldn't
| introduce it without a breaking change...
|
| I would note however that although VB is not C#, it is copying an already
| established mechanism for the xml docs, so consistancy may have been
| desirable :-)
|
| > NOTE: The official VB spec is ambiguous also:
| >
| >
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=6D50D709-EAA4-44D7-8AF3-E14280403E6E&displaylang=en
| >
| > I hope you realize I was pointing out that the VB & C# documentation are
| > both ambiguous about the matter. This ambiguity obviously does not prove
| > or disprove the matter either way.
|
| I wouldn't say the C# spec is ambiguous
| "The documentation generator must accept and process any tag that is valid
| according to the rules of XML."
|
| Not much room for ambiguity there! Even if the tag is semantically wrong,
C#
| must pass it :-)
|
|
| As I see it, the problem with the VB implementation is that, when a
| "suspect" documentation tag is found, it ignores the *entire* comment
block.
| So if you do anything VB considers wrong, you get no documentation
| whatsoever !
|
| IMHO, a compiler warning for the problem tag, and ignoring that specific
tag
| only, would have been sufficient...
|
|
|
| Kevin
|
|
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: BUG in VB.NET XML comment engine?
- From: Ray Cassick \(Home\)
- Re: BUG in VB.NET XML comment engine?
- Prev by Date: Re: How to make mouse pointer to waiting status for desktop?
- Next by Date: Re: ListView Sorting
- Previous by thread: Re: Loading Large Lists
- Next by thread: Re: BUG in VB.NET XML comment engine?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
