Commenting the result type would be sufficient, so a dev could click on the result of each operation and see a description of the result type. Similar to the L/A, etc things in JTS docs. But each overload should have docs, even if its a copy paste job with relevant changes.



On Mar 13, 2014, at 10:01 PM, BrandonNoad <notifications@github.com> wrote:

> In feature/src/main/scala/geotrellis/feature/Polygon.scala:
> 
> > @@ -62,24 +62,54 @@ case class Polygon(jtsGeom: jts.Polygon) extends Geometry
> >    assert(!jtsGeom.isEmpty)
> >    assert(jtsGeom.isValid)
> >  
> > +  /**
> > +   * Tests whether this Polygon is a rectangle.
> > +   */
> I can do that.
> 
> Just wondering how I should document intersection, union, etc. Should each overload have its own documentation, or just a single comment for intersection, another one for union, etc.? If each overload is getting its own comment, should I describe all the possible Geometries that the Result type could be?
> 
> —
> Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.