From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,3334f982144a667d
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: nabbasi@earthlink.net
Subject: Re: javadoc => adadoc?
Date: 1998/08/01
Message-ID: <6pvslq$poo@drn.newsguy.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 377049312
References: <6ptlbe$k3$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>
Organization: Newsguy News Service [http://www.newsguy.com]
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1998-08-01T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In article <6ptlbe$k3$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, nelson@blaze-net.com says...

>Are there any tools, public or otherwise, which can document an Ada
>program like Sun's javadoc?  I perused the usual Ada web sites, but
>didn't see anything (but there are a couple Ada html related tools).
>
 
there was some discussion on this on some ada mailing lists.

it seems to me that the need for adadoc is much less than for java.

in java, there is no separation between the specification and implementation
of the package, so one uses the tool javadoc to 'pull out' the specifications
into an html nicly formatted output so one can look it and know what the API
is.

in Ada, one can simply look at the speification part of the package, no tool
is needed to 'pull out' the API out of the body as is the case with java.

one more reason why I think Ada is a better language than Java.

Nasser