Hi Hannes:
On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 10:46:47AM +0200, Hannes Magnusson wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 21:17, Daniel Convissor
> <dani...@analysisandsolutions.com> wrote:
> > If you're talking about the same <example>, I agree. ?If you are talking
> > about the same <programlisting>, I disagree because it will lengthen and
> > clutter the example.
>
> Take DateTime::setTime() as an example.
> It has 4 examples, all using the OO way. Duplicating the entire
> example for the procedural way feels like a useless clutter to me,
That's funny. I thought of the same thing as I was puttering around my
apartment this morning.
> even if its in a different <example>.
> Add one example (into the OO <example>) for date_time_set() which is
> identical to the last ::setTime() example and a comment above it,
> mentioning it, should be enough.
What seems clearest to me is to have Example #1 be drop dead simple use
case and be composed of an OOP programlisting, a procedural
programlisting and finally the screen output. Any further examples will
only be in OOP. How does that sound?
> > Perhaps:
> > ? ?public int mysqli->affected_rows
> >
> > Or if it's static:
> > ? ?public int mysqli::affected_rows
> >
>
> That looks great (would be mysqli::$affected_rows for static though.. ;))
The trick is what's the combination of XML and rendering needed to get
there. I imagine the stuff that does this is in doc-base. Any leads on
where to look will be appreciated, please.
Thanks,
--Dan
--
T H E A N A L Y S I S A N D S O L U T I O N S C O M P A N Y
data intensive web and database programming
http://www.AnalysisAndSolutions.com/
4015 7th Ave #4, Brooklyn NY 11232 v: 718-854-0335 f: 718-854-0409
