Mattias Gaertner schrieb:
On Sat, 23 Jul 2011 16:59:14 +0100
Hans-Peter Diettrich wrote:
[...]
As already mentioned in another mail, all links to #LCL are broken now.
I changed the #LCL to #LCLBase in the lcl xml files.
Argh :-(
?
Why do you break existing documentation, which refers to
On Sat, 23 Jul 2011 16:59:14 +0100
Hans-Peter Diettrich wrote:
>[...]
> >> As already mentioned in another mail, all links to #LCL are broken now.
> >
> > I changed the #LCL to #LCLBase in the lcl xml files.
>
> Argh :-(
?
Mattias
--
___
Lazarus m
Martin schrieb:
Well, if the current documentation just repeats the name (with
fillwords) then it is useless IMO and should be deleted.
True and yet not...
Sure there is no point in having documentation, that is empty...
Removing empty documentation means work. It has to be ensured, that not
Howard Page-Clark schrieb:
I also can assign doc files to those people, which are willing to
proofread the documentation, so that we can avoid duplicate work.
I'm a native English speaker, and I'm willing to proofread
documentation, and make suggestions for improvements. However, I suspect
i
Mattias Gaertner schrieb:
> What if the method just does what the name says?
Then no extra documentation is needed.[...]
How to distinguish an item that needs documentation and an
item that does not need documentation?
Give an example?
DoDi
--
___
Mattias Gaertner schrieb:
Often I come across "circles", referring to circular unit references.
IMO the correct term instead would be "loops", in e.g. "avoid loops".
AFAIK the correct term in graph theory is "cycle".
Sounds good.
Many descriptions only describe the obvious, like method nam
On 23/07/2011 16:06, Jürgen Hestermann wrote:
Mattias Gaertner schrieb:
>> Then no extra documentation is needed.[...]
> How to distinguish an item that needs documentation and an
> item that does not need documentation?
Well, if the current documentation just repeats the name (with
fillwords)
On 23.07.2011 13:44, Ludo Brands wrote:
Probably helper types: http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/Helper_types
Yes, you are right. To explain this a bit:
In Delphi "helper" classes (and records) are basically classes that
magically derive from a TClassHelperBase (or so) class which in turn
Mattias Gaertner schrieb:
>> Then no extra documentation is needed.[...]
> How to distinguish an item that needs documentation and an
> item that does not need documentation?
Well, if the current documentation just repeats the name (with
fillwords) then it is useless IMO and should be deleted. B
On Sat, 23 Jul 2011 14:59:20 +0100
Howard Page-Clark wrote:
> On 23/7/11 1:20, Hans-Peter Diettrich wrote:
> > During the development of the doc tracker I stumbled over several issues:
> >
> > The English wording often violates my feeling for the language. Can some
> > native English speakers pro
On Sat, 23 Jul 2011 15:29:45 +0200
Jürgen Hestermann wrote:
> >> Many descriptions only describe the obvious, like method names
> expressed
> >> in more words. Such descriptions are quite useless, and should be
> >> replaced by more informative ones. I'd suggest to remove all these
> >> desc
On 23/7/11 1:20, Hans-Peter Diettrich wrote:
During the development of the doc tracker I stumbled over several issues:
The English wording often violates my feeling for the language. Can some
native English speakers proofread the documentation, and correct
stylistic flaws?
I also can assign
>> Many descriptions only describe the obvious, like method names
expressed
>> in more words. Such descriptions are quite useless, and should be
>> replaced by more informative ones. I'd suggest to remove all these
>> descriptions (replace by a todo-marker?), until somebody can describe
>> the el
On Sat, 23 Jul 2011 13:20:42 +0100
Hans-Peter Diettrich wrote:
>[...]
> Style related are field names like "childs", which IMO should read
> "Children"
Yes.
>[...]
> Often I come across "circles", referring to circular unit references.
> IMO the correct term instead would be "loops", in e.g.
Probably helper types: http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/Helper_types
Ludo
> -Message d'origine-
> De : Graeme Geldenhuys [mailto:graemeg.li...@gmail.com]
> Envoyé : samedi 23 juillet 2011 13:28
> À : Lazarus mailing list
> Objet : Re: [Lazarus] Does Lazarus v0.9.31 compile with the
>
> You'll need lazarus svn > 30332. FPC has added tkHelper in TTypeKind
> enumeration (typeinfo.pp).
Is there documentation on tkHelper? What exactly does it describe? Just curious.
Regards,
- Graeme -
--
Regards,
- Graeme -
___
fpGUI - a cross-
During the development of the doc tracker I stumbled over several issues:
The English wording often violates my feeling for the language. Can some
native English speakers proofread the documentation, and correct
stylistic flaws?
I don't want to discourage non-native speakers to contribute to
Hello Lazarus-List,
I had added a new set of components to Lazarus CCR
http://lazarus-ccr.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/lazarus-ccr/components/lazbarcodes/
to generate, currently, 2D barcodes:
* QR
* MicroQR
* Aztec
* Aztec Rune
* DataMatrix
The backend has been ported from Zint
http://sourceforge
The recent change in the package names has invalidated all #LCL links in
the documentation :-(
IMO the package names should be exchanged, so that LCL contains the
high-level components (equivalent to the Delphi VCL). The other package
can be renamed into e.g. "Widgetsets", to make clear what i
Mattias Gaertner schrieb:
Hans-Peter Diettrich hat am 18. Juli 2011 um
15:20 geschrieben:
> Is it normal that the codetools try to insert e.g. "end;" into comments,
> while editing the comment?
No. Please create a bug report with an example.
I couldn't reproduce this one yet, it may be du
20 matches
Mail list logo