"Nick Sabalausky" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]... > "AJ" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]... >> >> "Adam D. Ruppe" <[email protected]> wrote in message >> news:[email protected]... >>> On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 08:05:46PM -0500, AJ wrote: >>>> Well of course header files will have comments. The thing is though, >>>> tomes >>>> of documentation are not necessary you have header files. And what are >>>> the >>>> chances that the documentation will be in synch with the code if the >>>> documentation is external? Much better chance of that if the header >>>> file IS >>>> the documentation and the code is crafted such that it needs very >>>> little >>>> doc. >>> >>> That's what ddoc is all about. >>> >>> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/ddoc.html >> >> Even that is over-kill when formal documentation is not required. "one >> size fits all" hardly ever does (never?). Sure, if you're Microsoft, you >> need to formally document in great detail the API. But most development >> does not require the large-scale solutions. A lot of times (I'd say the >> common case) does not require external formal documentation. While these >> kinds of things may be nice in certain situations, they don't wipe out >> everything else once they are created. My way of thinking is such that >> eliminates the need for yet another programming task while your's seems >> to be to take that task for granted and automate it. That's fine, there's >> no one correct answer other than do it the way you like to. I won't be >> ditching header files. >> >>> >>> /// Some little documentation >>> int someFunction(int a, int b) { implementation } >>> >>> All in one file. >> >> > > If you want to manually write a separate redundant file with just > declarations before writing the implementation, no one's stopping you.
You sound angry that your feature is not a fit for my development process. "jump in and start coding algorithms" is not an acceptable development method in my book.
