In the #concatenative channel recently, a user complained about not being able
to find documentation for the "<" in a TUPLE: declaration. Of course, this is
covered in the documentation for TUPLE: itself, but when you "see" a tuple
definition in the listener, the "<", unlike most syntactic elements, does not
link to any syntax-specific documentation. I think it would be a big
improvement if the tuple "<" and other pure syntactic tokens, such as the "=>"
in FROM: or the "--" in a ( ) or (( )) stack effect, were rendered as links to
the main syntax word, so clicking on the "<" would take you to the TUPLE:
documentation, "=>" would link to FROM:, "--" would link to "(" or "(("
(depending on the enclosing form), and so on.
I think this behavior would also suit closing delimiters, such as "}", "]",
";", and so on. The documentation for these words themselves is pretty
useless—usually, people are going to want to see the documentation for the
actual definition form being used, whether it be "{", "V{", "H{", ":", "MEMO:",
or what have you. In summary, any syntactic token should link to the docs of
the main syntactic form it is a part of. What do you guys think?
-Joe
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Start uncovering the many advantages of virtual appliances
and start using them to simplify application deployment and
accelerate your shift to cloud computing.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/novell-sfdev2dev
_______________________________________________
Factor-talk mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk
