Warren Lynn <wrn.l...@gmail.com> writes: > Is there a way to create doc strings on both interfaces (procotols, > multi functions) and concrete implementations (protocol > implementation, multi-methods)?
No, I don't think so. > Assuming we don't have it yet, what I am hoping for is, when I do (doc > symbol), or use slime-describe-symbol, it should list the doc strings > for the interfaces along with the doc strings of all of its concrete > implementations. You could use alter-meta! to add a hunk to the docstring of the "interface" at the place where you add a new implementation (to have impl and docs near each other). Not all interfacy thingies know their implementations, btw, so having separate docs for the impls wouldn't neccessarily allow what you request above. > Another thing I hope for (but less important), is to be able to have > different doc strings for different signatures of the same function. In general, all different versions of a function should somehow do the same thing, so with separate docstrings you'd need to repeat yourself. A good guideline is to write the "big picture" first, followed by the meaning of the different parameters. Bye, Tassilo -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
