On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 19:47:39 +0200, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote: > I rejected it. I personally dislike markup within source code, and > adding such a target would imply that we want to add such markup > throughout.
Well, Haddock would still be somewhat useful even without any markup in the source, in that you get a nice clickable overview of the darcs modules and the functions they contain. > As far as I remember the discussion that happened the last time you > submitted this patch: > > - Jason and Eric are in favour of Haddock markup in the sources; I might have already said this, but I also think we should continue the practice of documenting the literate-darcs way by splicing bits of manual throughout the relevant code. It's a very compact and easy-to-maintain way of doing things. The question is then whether or not it would hurt to have the occasional, one might even say sparing, use of haddock markup to clarify things from one darcs hacker to another. I wouldn't go out and encourage a go-add-haddock-to-every-darcs-function iniative, and I certainly would not like to see any "this function increments the x counter" type comments, but I weakly believe that having small doses of haddock would more help the budding darcs hacker than it would clutter up the code. -- Eric Kow http://www.loria.fr/~kow PGP Key ID: 08AC04F9 Merci de corriger mon français.
pgpyk2Emxg2mZ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ darcs-devel mailing list [email protected] http://www.abridgegame.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/darcs-devel
