What would also help - I think - is to make the ScalaDoc looking less
> ... frightening. :-)
>
> Although I think the current ScalaDoc makes it much easier than before,
> it's easy to get lost in there. Recently I tried to find name of the
> function in Map to execute a function for each entry and get the collection
> of the results. In the end I used Google search to find this is the "map"
> function.
>
>

I also would have accepted `collect`, `flatMap` or using a for-comprehension
:)

More seriously though, a hoogle-like ability to find methods by their type
signature has been requested several times.  One of Scala's GSOC projects
this year is working with colladoc (http://scala-webapps.epfl.ch/colladoc/),
a wiki-like collaborative editor for Scala's documentation. It would be nice
if this work could also include adding such a facility.


-- 
Kevin Wright

gtalk / msn : [email protected]
<[email protected]>mail: [email protected]
vibe / skype: kev.lee.wright
quora: http://www.quora.com/Kevin-Wright
twitter: @thecoda

"My point today is that, if we wish to count lines of code, we should not
regard them as "lines produced" but as "lines spent": the current
conventional wisdom is so foolish as to book that count on the wrong side of
the ledger" ~ Dijkstra

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The 
Java Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.

Reply via email to