marking up Java constructors in docbook

marking up Java constructors in docbook

[Bill Brooks]

Hi,

How are people doing API-level documentation in DocBook? 

My immediate need is to produce some documentation of a Java class, in the
same way that JavaDoc does, but I need it to play nice inside an overall
DocBook manual, so just inserting the HTML that javadoc generates won't
do. Eventually, when I get the DocBook markup the way I want it, I'll
figure out how to use the XML javadoc doclet and XSLT to transform what
javadoc spits out into what I want (in)directly. 

Anyway, what I'm trying to figure out how to markup a constructor in Java.
Here's what I have:

      <funcsynopsis>
      <funcprototype>
        <funcdef> <function>StatusCheck</function>
        </funcdef><void>
      </funcprototype>
      </funcsynopsis>

...unfortunately, the <void> appears to be mandatory because if I leave it
out I get a syntax error. 

The Java language doesn't allow one to indicate that a method takes no
argument by writing Foo(void). One simply writes Foo(). 

Does anyone have any suggestions for how to approach marking up a Java
class' constructor? Thanks in advance. 

Bill

marking up Java constructors in docbook

[Bill Brooks]

Hi,

How are people doing API-level documentation in DocBook? 

My immediate need is to produce some documentation of a Java class, in the
same way that JavaDoc does, but I need it to play nice inside an overall
DocBook manual, so just inserting the HTML that javadoc generates won't
do. Eventually, when I get the DocBook markup the way I want it, I'll
figure out how to use the XML javadoc doclet and XSLT to transform what
javadoc spits out into what I want (in)directly. 

Anyway, what I'm trying to figure out how to markup a constructor in Java.
Here's what I have:

      <funcsynopsis>
      <funcprototype>
        <funcdef> <function>StatusCheck</function>
        </funcdef><void>
      </funcprototype>
      </funcsynopsis>

...unfortunately, the <void> appears to be mandatory because if I leave it
out I get a syntax error. 

The Java language doesn't allow one to indicate that a method takes no
argument by writing Foo(void). One simply writes Foo(). 

Does anyone have any suggestions for how to approach marking up a Java
class' constructor? Thanks in advance. 

Bill

RE: marking up Java constructors in docbook

[Scott Goodwin]

	Hmmm...although I haven't looked closely at DocBook 4, I did read something
about it supporting newer object-oriented languages - yep, here it is in the
release notes:

- Added synopsis markup for modern programming languages (e.g, object
  oriented languages like Java, C++, and IDL)

	And here's the url: http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/sgml/4.1/40chg.txt

s.

-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Brooks [ mailto:wbrooks@lug.ee.calpoly.edu ]
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2000 4:49 PM
To: docbook-tools-discuss@sourceware.cygnus.com
Subject: marking up Java constructors in docbook


Hi,

How are people doing API-level documentation in DocBook?

My immediate need is to produce some documentation of a Java class, in the
same way that JavaDoc does, but I need it to play nice inside an overall
DocBook manual, so just inserting the HTML that javadoc generates won't
do. Eventually, when I get the DocBook markup the way I want it, I'll
figure out how to use the XML javadoc doclet and XSLT to transform what
javadoc spits out into what I want (in)directly.

Anyway, what I'm trying to figure out how to markup a constructor in Java.
Here's what I have:

      <funcsynopsis>
      <funcprototype>
        <funcdef> <function>StatusCheck</function>
        </funcdef><void>
      </funcprototype>
      </funcsynopsis>

...unfortunately, the <void> appears to be mandatory because if I leave it
out I get a syntax error.

The Java language doesn't allow one to indicate that a method takes no
argument by writing Foo(void). One simply writes Foo().

Does anyone have any suggestions for how to approach marking up a Java
class' constructor? Thanks in advance.

Bill

RE: marking up Java constructors in docbook

[Scott Goodwin]

	Hmmm...although I haven't looked closely at DocBook 4, I did read something
about it supporting newer object-oriented languages - yep, here it is in the
release notes:

- Added synopsis markup for modern programming languages (e.g, object
  oriented languages like Java, C++, and IDL)

	And here's the url: http://www.oasis-open.org/docbook/sgml/4.1/40chg.txt

s.

-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Brooks [ mailto:wbrooks@lug.ee.calpoly.edu ]
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2000 4:49 PM
To: docbook-tools-discuss@sourceware.cygnus.com
Subject: marking up Java constructors in docbook


Hi,

How are people doing API-level documentation in DocBook?

My immediate need is to produce some documentation of a Java class, in the
same way that JavaDoc does, but I need it to play nice inside an overall
DocBook manual, so just inserting the HTML that javadoc generates won't
do. Eventually, when I get the DocBook markup the way I want it, I'll
figure out how to use the XML javadoc doclet and XSLT to transform what
javadoc spits out into what I want (in)directly.

Anyway, what I'm trying to figure out how to markup a constructor in Java.
Here's what I have:

      <funcsynopsis>
      <funcprototype>
        <funcdef> <function>StatusCheck</function>
        </funcdef><void>
      </funcprototype>
      </funcsynopsis>

...unfortunately, the <void> appears to be mandatory because if I leave it
out I get a syntax error.

The Java language doesn't allow one to indicate that a method takes no
argument by writing Foo(void). One simply writes Foo().

Does anyone have any suggestions for how to approach marking up a Java
class' constructor? Thanks in advance.

Bill

Re: marking up Java constructors in docbook

[Norman Walsh]

/ Bill Brooks <wbrooks@lug.ee.calpoly.edu> was heard to say:
| Anyway, what I'm trying to figure out how to markup a constructor in Java.
| Here's what I have:
| 
|       <funcsynopsis>
|       <funcprototype>
|         <funcdef> <function>StatusCheck</function>
|         </funcdef><void>
|       </funcprototype>
|       </funcsynopsis>
| 
| ...unfortunately, the <void> appears to be mandatory because if I leave it
| out I get a syntax error. 

DocBook 4.x introduced ClassSynopsis for this purpose.

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | Man's sensitivity to little things and
http://nwalsh.com/            | insensitivity to the greatest are the
                              | signs of a strange disorder.--Pascal