To answer my own question regarding possible alternatives to hahn: I
found that simply writing documentation to source with a special comment
prefix and then extracting that with some shell voodoo will be closest
to what I want.
My main gripe with hahn is that IDEs will commonly not recognize the @()
docstrings as such, so they will cause a lot of visual clutter in the
source. So instead I'll just extract comments starting with a triple
semicolon and write those to a wiki file.
$ cat file.scm | sed 's/^[ \t]+//' | grep -e "^;;;" | cut -b 5- > file.wiki
I considered writing documenting comments in Markdown and then pipe
those through markdown-svnwiki, but I feel like there's little benefit
over just writing comments directly in svnwiki syntax.
Obviously there's a lot of room for improvement here. For instance it
would be great to have a way of automatically converting procedure
definitions into <procedure>(fn args) blocks. Also, support for
multi-line comments and extracting info from .meta files would be nice
to have.
Would anybody be interested in having an egg that provides this sort of
functionality? I'm under the impression that hardly anybody uses hahn so
I imagine nobody would use this either.
Best wishes,
-Heinz
_______________________________________________
Chicken-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
