Great, just pushed some other changes so I'll look into this later this
week.
Having a quick look though, sprint(Markdown.terminal_print, ans) strips out
the line wrapping. Is there an easy way to retain that formatting in the
string?
On Monday, 9 June 2014 10:49:56 UTC+2, Mike Innes wrote:
>
> I just fixed it up to work with n level headers – it should do everything
> you need it to now.
>
> Just to get you started, this will render the first docstring from
> docile.md:
>
> julia> Markdown.Block(Markdown.parse_file("/users/Mike/Documents/docile.md
> ")[3:7])
> julia> sprint(Markdown.terminal_print, ans)
>
> On Sunday, 8 June 2014 22:07:40 UTC+1, Michael Hatherly wrote:
>>
>> So it does :) I'll have a closer look soon.
>>
>> On Sunday, 8 June 2014 22:29:13 UTC+2, Tim Holy wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sunday, June 08, 2014 01:16:51 PM Michael Hatherly wrote:
>>> > Since everything in help is in Base as
>>> > well, it doesn't seem to be a problem currently.
>>>
>>> Actually, the help system does take the module into account (I believe
>>> Carlo
>>> Baldassi implemented this):
>>>
>>> help> Base.print
>>> Base.print(x)
>>>
>>> Write (to the default output stream) a canonical (un-decorated)
>>> text representation of a value if there is one, otherwise call
>>> "show". The representation used by "print" includes minimal
>>> formatting and tries to avoid Julia-specific details.
>>>
>>> help> Profile.print
>>> Base.Profile.print([io::IO = STDOUT], [data::Vector]; format = :tree, C
>>> =
>>> false, combine = true, cols = tty_cols())
>>>
>>> Prints profiling results to "io" (by default, "STDOUT"). If you
>>> do not supply a "data" vector, the internal buffer of accumulated
>>> backtraces will be used. "format" can be ":tree" or ":flat".
>>> If "C==true", backtraces from C and Fortran code are shown.
>>> "combine==true" merges instruction pointers that correspond to
>>> the same line of code. "cols" controls the width of the display.
>>>
>>> Base.Profile.print([io::IO = STDOUT], data::Vector, lidict::Dict; format
>>> =
>>> :tree, combine = true, cols = tty_cols())
>>>
>>> Prints profiling results to "io". This variant is used to examine
>>> results exported by a previous call to "Profile.retrieve()".
>>> Supply the vector "data" of backtraces and a dictionary
>>> "lidict" of line information.
>>>
>>>
>>> > I'll take another look
>>> > when I get a chance.
>>> >
>>> > [1] https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/blob/master/base/help.jl#L102
>>> >
>>> > On Sunday, 8 June 2014 21:32:36 UTC+2, Tim Holy wrote:
>>> > > I agree with Daniel. We just need _something_, and on this issue the
>>> > > diversity
>>> > > of tastes seems to make consensus impossible. So kudos to you. I
>>> really
>>> > > hope
>>> > > this keeps moving forward.
>>> > >
>>> > > What prevents it from working with functions rather than strings?
>>> > >
>>> > > --Tim
>>> > >
>>> > > On Saturday, June 07, 2014 02:16:11 PM Daniel Jones wrote:
>>> > > > A good way of documenting packages is one of the biggest gaps in
>>> the
>>> > > > julia ecosystem right now. Part of the reason why is evinced in
>>> the
>>> > > > issues you cite: no matter what the system is, someone is going to
>>> hate
>>> > > > it. At this point, I'm sort of hoping someone will just ignore all
>>> > > > feedback and build whatever they want.
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > That said, I think this is a pretty elegant solution. Just relying
>>> on
>>> > > > markdown h1 and h2 headers leaves open the possibility of
>>> generating
>>> > > > html documentation from the same source. That's something I
>>> appreciate,
>>> > > > since I'd also want to generate html docs with example plots
>>> rendered
>>> > > > for gadfly.
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > With Jake Bolewski's julia parser, I hope it will become easier to
>>> > > > extract documentation from source code, either from comments or
>>> > > > something like docstrings. Have you given any though to that?
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > On Thu, Jun 5, 2014, at 03:13 PM, Michael Hatherly wrote:
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Hi all,
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > I've just put up a rough prototype for package documentation at
>>> > > > [1]https://github.com/MichaelHatherly/Docile.jl. This is not
>>> meant to
>>> > > > be a solution to the documentation problem, but rather to start
>>> some
>>> > > > fresh discussion on the matter.
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Any feedback would be great. There's more details in the readme.
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Regards,
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Mike
>>> > > >
>>> > > > References
>>> > > >
>>> > > > 1. https://github.com/MichaelHatherly/Docile.jl
>>>
>>
