I too am getting a little disappointed by this "do what you want" attitude. The whole reason most of us are here for is to create a standard that we all agree on. The definition of a standard is something established by authority, custom, or general consent as a model or example. If each one us does what we want, then there isn't much use for any of us to learn/use this method. The whole reason I want to learn this method (both FuseDocs and FuseBox) is so that my code can be understood by others, there can be an exchange of fuses so that I don't have to keep rewriting code that someone else has already done, and other people can understand my code. I agree that the standard must be flexible, but at the same time, some of you have taken the lead on molding this "standard" that we all are trying to learn/use. I hope that we can move on past the "political" discussions and get to the good stuff that makes programming fun! ____________________________________________ Julian Easterling, Systems Developer The CDM Group -- Chevy Chase, MD USA jeasterling @ cdmgroup.com A journey of a thousand miles begin with a single step. -----Original Message----- From: Lee Borkman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 29, 2000 11:13 AM To: Fusebox Subject: Re: FuseDoc: New version being accepted? Hi Fred, I must say this "do what you want" expression is getting to sound a little unpleasant ;-) We will all do what we want, of course. But we are also in this group to help and be helped. Part of the idea of FuseDocs and my inline comments is that you have special comments can be identified by a parser and used in automated documentation, validation, etc. In this sense, yes, there are some comments that you don't particularly want to see in the extracted documentation (eg, initialize temporary variable for accumulating string). Furthermore, tagging your comments with a CommentType allows them to be grouped apropriately for display. My original idea was that this would allow inline comments to be re-assembled into something like Hal's FuseStub, but this is obviously unnecessary if FuseStubs are included explicitly. My current intention is to go with Hal's Fuse-stubs, but to also parse specially marked inline comments into the same structure, so that the choice remains with the developer about how they want to do these things. As has been noted here often enough, we are not in the business of imposing our methods on others. To summarize, there will be three types of comment: 1: FuseDoc fuse-stub; 2: Specially-marked inline comments (semantically equivalent to the FuseDoc fuse-stub comments; 3: Standard inline comments, ignored by parser and auto-documentation routines. This way, the choice is the developer's (or the organization's). Use Hal's fuse-stubs, or equivalent inline comments, or both, or none. will write a single parser and a single display module to handle all of these options. The result should be that we get the same auto-documentation, independent of the low-level comment syntax chosen by the developer. All I'm aiming at, Fred, is a solution that's flexible enough for most everyone, without descending to anything-goes confusion. I know you hate the idea of standards, so I'm just offering to distribute the tools I have made on the off chance that someone else might find them useful. As for myself, I will now be using FuseDoc fuse-stubs with the odd inline comment where appropriate. Thanks all, Lee Bjork Borkman Bjork.Net - ColdFusion Tags by Bjork "Fred T. Sanders" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I'm having a little trouble understanding why you need to make the inline comment with an additional @ added. If your only doing it so that you can define which comments to pull and which not to, then I think maybe you should re-evaluate what your commenting and why the block of code is commented in the first place. There shouldn't be useful and non-useful comments. They should either be useful comments or they shouldn't be there. My 2 cents, do what you want. Fred T. Sanders Charlottesville, VA ____________________________________________________________________ Get free email and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/fusebox or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ To Unsubscribe visit http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists&body=lists/fusebox or send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with 'unsubscribe' in the body.
