I see what you mean now. Once I've completed a v1.0 of the Intellisense, I'll happily strip out all the comments and provide the 'mock' JS file for anyone who wants it!
On Apr 23, 10:20 am, Sebastian Markbåge <[email protected]> wrote: > What I meant was that we should maintain a single mock project like > yours that can be used by several different IDEs. Maybe a common API > format that can be used to generate -vsdoc files, JSDoc, ScriptDoc and > other helper formats. > > Microsoft will probably continue to maintain the jQuery -vsdoc file > with new versions, yea. But other frameworks will probably have to > maintain their own. > > As far as I know you can't get new lines in the tooltips. > > On Apr 22, 11:40 pm, fakedarren <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Glad you like it! > > > I agree, it would be really nice if we could structure something that > > allows us to document everything all in one go - unfortunately with > > this Intellisense it's not going to be possible until MS make a half- > > decent JS parser - it can't even parse Core.js without breaking - so > > unfortunately I had to go with a pseudo moo file, who's job it is to > > just represent moo functionality, not replicate it. > > > It is going to be a hassle to support something like this > > unfortunately, until someone at MS sorts out a decent JS parser - but > > worth the effort. > > > I'm very intrigued about the much vaunted jQuery Intellisense that has > > been mentioned - even their source file had to be edited because it > > can't be parsed, hence the hotfix to allow -vsdoc files - this should > > be something that is available to all JS frameworks - not just Moo or > > jQuery, but also stuff like Dojo / Prototype et al - if it just works > > for jQuery, then it's an unfair advantage against other frameworks > > (particularly those that extend native objects - it can't hack clever > > ways of extending prototypes, it only understands stuff like > > Array.prototype.method() ). > > > Will they just continue to release hotfixes that just 'fix' jQuery > > Intellisense? Or will they release hotfixes that mend their broken JS > > parser? I reckon probably the first option. > > > I'm impressed by jQuery Intellisense - it's a great selling point. But > > I don't want it to be exclusive because it's unfair. Anyway, will > > persevere! Mooooooo! > > > PS. How do I get new lines in Intellisense tooltips? If you know > > please share! > > > On Apr 22, 8:58 pm, Sebastian Markbåge <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Excellent initiative! Was just talking about this in the IRC channel > > > earlier today. > > > > I think that we need a more general project that maintains a > > > structured API documentation and mock scripts like these for use with > > > various IDE tools and documentation formats. > > > > Otherwise it's going to be a hassle to maintain in the future. > > > > On 22 Apr, 15:10, fakedarren <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I've recently been working on Intellisense documentation for MooTools. > > > > > You can find it here:http://code.google.com/p/mootoolsintellisense/ > > > > > This is not 100% finished yet, I need to finish adding in notes for > > > > some of the latter classes like Fx, Request etc but most of the > > > > methods should be listed, just no descriptions. Hope to get a full > > > > version up over the next week or so. > > > > > Have a look at the wiki tab for more info / how to use. Any feedback > > > > welcome, particularly if you can think of a good way to display all > > > > the different options available when defining a new instance, or all > > > > the available getters/setters....
