Fix inconsistencies in JSDoc style

[mjethani]

Background

The JSDoc comments in adblockpluscore contain a number of inconsistencies in style:

• The "summary" (first sentence) of the comment for a variable, function, or class ends in a period in some but not all instances
• In some instances the comments use the Array.<type> syntax while in others they use the type[] syntax
• @return vs. @returns
• Objects are usually denoted as {Object} but occasionally as {object}
• Nullables (optionals) are not always marked with ? (@type) or [] (@param)

There may be more inconsistencies.

What to change

Fix any inconsistencies (and inconsistencies only!) in JSDoc style. This includes inconsistencies in the way types are denoted and the JSDoc keywords that are used (e.g. @return vs. @returns), obvious (objective) punctuation inconsistencies like summaries ending in periods, inconsistencies in terms used to refer to things (e.g. if it's "element hiding emulation filter" then it should be called the same in all places, not occasionally "emulation hiding filter"), and so on.

Do not make "improvements" to the actual content of the comments and what they convey as part of this issue.

[mjethani]

I'll take this up.

[sebastian]

Sorry, but we switched to GitLab. If this issue is still relevant, please file it again in the ​new issue tracker.