> > What if instead of <signature type="string"> and <def type="string"> > > we simply use <string>? Would that work? > > Functionally yes, but I can only think of one person who has ever > used 'string' in an egg: myself. In my opinion, the <def> tag > should be there for really unusual cases such as that, since > we can't think of every type of definition. > > Check out the sqlite3-tinyclos doc for another example; Thomas thought up > 'class' and 'method', which were not in eggdoc. (The 'signature' type was put > in eggdoc for just that case.) > > I still think <def> is useful for unusual or unimplemented definitions, unless > you really want to restrict people to a few major definition types (or update > svnwiki every time someone thinks of a new one).
I think this wouldn't be very hard to do, since they would all behave pretty much in the same way. We can probably just keep a list with them (ie. '(string class method)) that we add to as needed. That is, I think you're assuming that adding new ones is hard, and I'm just letting you know that nah, once everything is in place, it would be rather easy. :-) So I'll add support for <string>, <class> and <method>. Does that sound good to you? Alejo. http://azul.freaks-unidos.net/ _______________________________________________ Chicken-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
