Adam, I wonder could we also have information since what Phobos
version particular symbol is available from. For an example, from
which version of Phobos we have findSkip() ??
On Tuesday, 29 December 2015 at 14:13:54 UTC, Dejan Lekic wrote:
Adam, I wonder could we also have information since what Phobos
version particular symbol is available from. For an example,
from which version of Phobos we have findSkip() ??
Yeah, I was thinking about that too. The info isn't
I've started some parsing of ddoc sections and continue work on
the formatter:
http://dpldocs.info/experimental-docs/std.algorithm.searching.findSplit.html
I'm pretty happy with how this is turning out. Going to add more
rich info to params later - I realize I can't parse all
constraints,
On Saturday, 26 December 2015 at 19:56:13 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe
wrote:
Still quite a bit to do but it is getting there. I'm using
Brian Schott's libdparse to get the source. I want to borrow
some of his DCD code to do the scope name lookups and make
those dummy links real, and then it is the task
On Saturday, 26 December 2015 at 19:56:13 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe
wrote:
http://dpldocs.info/experimental-docs/std.algorithm.searching.findSkip.html
BTW the missing code sample is a documented unittest, which my
thing hasn't implemented yet.
On Friday, 25 December 2015 at 05:06:47 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
My mock:
http://arsdnet.net/mydoc.html
Verily, this is the status quo:
http://dlang.org/phobos/std_algorithm_searching.html#findSkip
Well, the mock is starting to become a reality:
On Saturday, 26 December 2015 at 20:43:18 UTC, Brian Schott wrote:
The name lookup code is here:
https://github.com/Hackerpilot/dsymbol.
Aye, I'm still just working on figuring out how to use it :)
But since DCD does I should be able to borrow a lil code from
there to make it happen.
If
On Saturday, 26 December 2015 at 21:38:23 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe
wrote:
I do NOT want the current symbol to be highlighted.
Harbored doesn't do that either. The only time I use that feature
in ddoc is to disable it.
On Friday, 25 December 2015 at 05:06:47 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
I wrote this manually as a mock of what I really want the docs
to look like. I only marked up the top box and a wee bit of the
bottom. The body text of the doc is written by us and is OK,
but the function signature is a mess.
On Friday, 25 December 2015 at 14:13:56 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Friday, 25 December 2015 at 09:18:45 UTC, Israel wrote:
Why not take it to the next level while youre at it? Add user
comments that can be rated by users and sorted by date.
My dream does not include user comments. I don't
On Friday, 25 December 2015 at 09:18:45 UTC, Israel wrote:
Why not take it to the next level while youre at it? Add user
comments that can be rated by users and sorted by date.
My dream does not include user comments. I don't think
well-written documentation benefits from them, and adding
On Friday, 25 December 2015 at 14:50:06 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
This linked page is my dream for a narrow part of the docs: the
function signature. The whitespace formatting can be worked
into existing ddoc (I'm angry with existing ddoc and don't want
to work with it for a while, but it
On Friday, 25 December 2015 at 15:51:02 UTC, rcorre wrote:
On Friday, 25 December 2015 at 14:24:34 UTC, Bubbasaur wrote:
What happens when I see a DOC with comments is that sometimes
the comments are more clear than the Doc itself, or there are
tips or tricks that was not "well" documented.
On Friday, 25 December 2015 at 07:41:11 UTC, James Hofmann wrote:
On Friday, 25 December 2015 at 05:06:47 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe
wrote:
I strongly agree Markdown is simple to use, and well supported.
No need to do work that has already been done. Besides, Github is
pretty popular nowadays.
On Friday, 25 December 2015 at 14:24:34 UTC, Bubbasaur wrote:
On Friday, 25 December 2015 at 14:13:56 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe
wrote:
On Friday, 25 December 2015 at 09:18:45 UTC, Israel wrote:
Why not take it to the next level while youre at it? Add user
comments that can be rated by users and
On Friday, 25 December 2015 at 07:41:11 UTC, James Hofmann wrote:
1. There's more code than ever and more of a need for code to
be well-documented on a conceptual/hand-holding level
Absolutely.
general idea of fitting the text into a certain container is
similar to the API doc tradition of
On Friday, 25 December 2015 at 14:24:34 UTC, Bubbasaur wrote:
What happens when I see a DOC with comments is that sometimes
the comments are more clear than the Doc itself, or there are
tips or tricks that was not "well" documented.
Bubba.
If the comments are more clear than the Doc, then
On Friday, 25 December 2015 at 22:26:46 UTC, bachmeier wrote:
Filing a bug is a better approach. It's best to keep everything
in one place.
Bugzilla sucks hard though, on pretty much every level. It is
separate from the page itself, people might not even know it is
there, you have to log in,
On Friday, 25 December 2015 at 17:00:05 UTC, default0 wrote:
On Friday, 25 December 2015 at 14:50:06 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe
wrote:
Aren't these usually called tutorials? Or am I misunderstanding
what you mean here?
A single page really detailing what a function does and
providing an example for
On Friday, 25 December 2015 at 15:51:02 UTC, rcorre wrote:
On Friday, 25 December 2015 at 14:24:34 UTC, Bubbasaur wrote:
What happens when I see a DOC with comments is that sometimes
the comments are more clear than the Doc itself, or there are
tips or tricks that was not "well" documented.
On Saturday, 26 December 2015 at 03:01:25 UTC, Israel wrote:
This is exactly how i feel. You might see me as coming too weak
because im used to C# and MSDN Docs holding my hand
If it wasn't for Microsoft documentation (I didn't use MSDN per
se, but a downloaded win32.hlp file - I didn't have
On Friday, 25 December 2015 at 19:00:13 UTC, karabuta wrote:
I strongly agree Markdown is simple to use, and well supported.
I don't like Markdown personally, though I don't hate it either.
A couple features in it are cool, but most of them are just meh
to me and a few of them I actively
On Friday, 25 December 2015 at 17:00:05 UTC, default0 wrote:
Aren't these usually called tutorials? Or am I misunderstanding
what you mean here?
Oh maybe, I've heard "tutorial" used in a lot of contexts and a
lot of meanings though, so I wanted to be more specific.
This is literally one of
I wrote this manually as a mock of what I really want the docs to
look like. I only marked up the top box and a wee bit of the
bottom. The body text of the doc is written by us and is OK, but
the function signature is a mess.
My mock:
http://arsdnet.net/mydoc.html
Verily, this is the status
On Friday, 25 December 2015 at 05:06:47 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
Next, observe the highlighted words... and go ahead and try to
click on them. Oh snap! They are links to the language features
used. This is the web, let's link all over the place. I want to
have relevant conceptual overviews
25 matches
Mail list logo
