On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 3:43 PM, Nick Wellnhofer <[email protected]> wrote: > On 02/12/2014 23:08, Marvin Humphrey wrote: >> >> I'd suggest including complete documentation only when a DocuComment >> appears in the .cfh source file. For subroutines, that will generally mean >> only novel methods and inert functions, but it's conceievable that an >> inherited method could provide a DocuComment explaining something about its >> implementation. >> >> For public methods whose interfaces are established in superclasses, I >> suggest linking only. > > I disagree. Especially for casual users, I think it's helpful to show all > the methods that a class implements. Otherwise, you miss many methods or you > end up permanently switching between the documentation of the class and one > or two of its superclasses. I'd only make an exception for Clownfish::Obj.
Well, I don't think our disagreement is that serious. I meant a link for each method, not a link for each ancestor class -- so it's not that I'm opposed to having inherited methods shown at all. (Thinking a little harder, my preference would be to follow the conventions of the host language community.) In any case, if you feel strongly about the issue, let's go with your plan. Marvin Humphrey
