1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Lack of Interest Missing source code documentation (1.2 RC)

Discussion in 'Closed Suggestions' started by AlexT, Jul 18, 2013.

  1. AlexT

    AlexT Well-Known Member

    I am not sure if this qualifies as a "bug", but since this section is also meant for things that "look out of place in XenForo", I thought to mention it here.

    Many if not most newly added methods in xF 1.2 RC miss documentation, such as description, @param and @return. This is unfortunate since it makes it much more difficult for developers to understand the code. This is in contrast to xF 1.1.x, where its source code is quite thoroughly documented.

    It would be nice if the missing source code documentation were to be added before the final release.
    xf_phantom, Walter and chulapi like this.
  2. chulapi

    chulapi Member

  3. AlexT

    AlexT Well-Known Member

    If KAM don't think of this as a bug (I kinda do, considering how well-documented 1.1 is in comparison, so maybe it's just an oversight), then I would probably have it moved to the suggestion section.
  4. Brogan

    Brogan XenForo Moderator Staff Member

    A bug by definition is something which causes the software to behave unexpectedly.

    I'm not sure this qualifies so really is a suggestion.
  5. Mike

    Mike XenForo Developer Staff Member

    It's not a bug so moved. :)
  6. AlexT

    AlexT Well-Known Member

    Don't have a problem with that. Although - "something that looks out of place" (bug section description) probably depends on the eye of the beholder. :p
  7. chulapi

    chulapi Member

    Nevermind your suggestion is a good one and I'm sure that @Mike and @Kier will take care of that :)
  8. xf_phantom

    xf_phantom Well-Known Member

    I agree. (but it's RC and i hoped to see this till gold^^)

    Specially the edithistoryhandler wasted some MINUTES of my life:p (it was because of $_prefix which wasn't implemented (i'm somebody who's just creating the class, extending it from the abstract handler and let the IDE implement all necessary methods.. that's why i would prefer to have abstract getter methods for this => it makes sure that the variables are set...

    the same happened me some years ago with the attachment handler and contentIdKey & contentRoute variable which were missing, till i saw the comments in the attachment handler... And because of the missing edithistoryhandler documentation, i was redirected to index till i started the debugger...

    Also $_prefix is a stupid name, in some classes / contexts it's prefix, sometimes it's called route or contentroute...... There's often no consistency :/

    SORRY for the offtopic:p
    Last edited: Jul 18, 2013

Share This Page