On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 7:56 AM, tim launchbury
t...@tlaunchbury.ukfsn.org wrote:
What is the procedure for editing / reviewing documentaion ?
It works like this:
1 Download svn lazarus
2 Make changes to the docs
3 Build the docs to see the result
4 Send a patch to the bug tracker
To edit the
On 07/25/2011 07:56 AM, tim launchbury wrote:
I feel that the documentaion formatting style consistency is important
and therefore would support the suggestion that the jedi formatter be
extended to cover this.
Huh? Jedi Formatter (which I assume you are referring to is actual JCF
or Jedi
On Mon, 25 Jul 2011 09:14:09 +0200
Graeme Geldenhuys graemeg.li...@gmail.com wrote:
On 07/25/2011 07:56 AM, tim launchbury wrote:
I feel that the documentaion formatting style consistency is important
and therefore would support the suggestion that the jedi formatter be
extended to
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 12:44 AM, Mattias Gaertner
nc-gaert...@netcologne.de wrote:
Why then have separate packages at all, when every GUI application
depends on both?
There are two type of output directories.
My initial idea to improve this was to invert the packages:
LCL containing forms,
On 07/25/2011 09:26 AM, Mattias Gaertner wrote:
It's about the examples. They are stored in separate files, pascal
source snippets.
Ah, I forgot about code samples inside the docs.
Regards,
- Graeme -
--
fpGUI Toolkit - a cross-platform GUI toolkit using Free Pascal
On 07/23/2011 03:59 PM, Howard Page-Clark wrote:
I suspect it is almost an endless task ...
Thanks for all contributors.
IMHO improving the help system is as very decent and beneficial task.
In fact this is (1) the help text, (2) the help displaying software and
(3) the infrastructure that
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 11:45 AM, Michael Schnell mschn...@lumino.de wrote:
Right now I am unsuccessfully trying to create the appropriate file
(lcl.inf) from the help source files (both build_lcl_docs and wipfc
crash).
You could try chm. I think that the Lazarus IDE reads chm, not inf
--
Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho felipemonteiro.carva...@gmail.com hat am 25. Juli
2011 um 11:45 geschrieben:
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 11:45 AM, Michael Schnell mschn...@lumino.de wrote:
Right now I am unsuccessfully trying to create the appropriate file
(lcl.inf) from the help source
On 07/25/2011 11:45 AM, Michael Schnell wrote:
Graeme convinced me that Docview is the best available help displaying
plugin for Lazarus.
...and with my commits of yesterday, DocView is even better. 5-10x
faster at startup (the more fonts you have installed, the faster it is
compared to the
On 07/25/2011 11:45 AM, Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote:
I think that the Lazarus IDE reads chm, not inf
Lazarus IDE doesn't read any help files (other that the limited tooltip
help directly from the fpdoc XML files). Real help is supplied via
external help viewers like your web browser,
On 07/25/2011 11:45 AM, Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote:
I think that the Lazarus IDE reads chm, not inf
Yep. You need to install docview as an external tool package. But this
does not provide any problems. You can trigger the keyword search from
the source code editor with a hotkey (I use
On 07/25/2011 12:19 PM, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
...and with my commits of yesterday, DocView is even better. 5-10x
faster at startup (the more fonts you have installed, the faster it is
compared to the old DocView startup times). I have also reduced memory
consumption by around 47%!
GREAT !
Sill me. Of course I need to recompile the docview project.
Buit after doing this I in fact can start the new docview as a stand
alone executable, but it does not show when I start it as an external
tool in Lazarus :(.
-Michael
--
___
Lazarus
On 07/25/2011 01:16 PM, Michael Schnell wrote:
Sill me. Of course I need to recompile the docview project.
Yes, I don't supply binaries in the repository.
Buit after doing this I in fact can start the new docview as a stand
alone executable, but it does not show when I start it as an
On 07/25/2011 01:45 PM, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
Yes, I don't supply binaries in the repository.
:)
Please get a repository update and try again.
Yep. It works now.
Thanks !
In future, the Lazarus mailing list admin [that's not me], would
appreciate it if you post fpGUI specific questions
On 07/25/2011 02:15 PM, Michael Schnell wrote:
Please get a repository update and try again.
Yep. It works now.
Excellent.
Hmm I consider handling very decent Lazarus external tools, that enhance
the Lazarus usability greatly, here is a quite good idea.
Me too, but I have been in trouble
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 2:31 PM, Graeme Geldenhuys
graemeg.li...@gmail.com wrote:
Hmm I consider handling very decent Lazarus external tools, that enhance
the Lazarus usability greatly, here is a quite good idea.
Me too, but I have been in trouble quite a few times with posts that
seem to
On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 1:52 AM, Hans-Peter Diettrich
drdiettri...@aol.com wrote:
I see absolutely no reason why the LCL should reside in a package of a
different name, and a package named LCL refers to something else.
I must say that I it seams to me that the inverse order would make more
On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 19:25:22 +0200
Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho felipemonteiro.carva...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 1:52 AM, Hans-Peter Diettrich
drdiettri...@aol.com wrote:
I see absolutely no reason why the LCL should reside in a package of a
different name, and a package
Mattias Gaertner schrieb:
The base units are independent of the widgetset units and the widgetset
units use the base units. So the package of widgetset units must use
the package of the base units.
Theoretically: If the base package would be named 'LCL', then
all existing projects would no
On Sun, 24 Jul 2011 23:52:44 +0100
Hans-Peter Diettrich drdiettri...@aol.com wrote:
Mattias Gaertner schrieb:
The base units are independent of the widgetset units and the widgetset
units use the base units. So the package of widgetset units must use
the package of the base units.
Hello all
Sorry for this not being in the thread..
I am a native English speaker and am willing to help with proofreading
documentation ( and possibly writing some ). Regarding UK/US
differences, my personal view is that they do not really matter as they
are for the most part insignificant.
I
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
On Sat, 23 Jul 2011 13:20:42 +0100
Hans-Peter Diettrich drdiettri...@aol.com 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,
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 elements
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?
snip
I also can
On Sat, 23 Jul 2011 15:29:45 +0200
Jürgen Hestermann juergen.hesterm...@gmx.de 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
On Sat, 23 Jul 2011 14:59:20 +0100
Howard Page-Clark h...@talktalk.net 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
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. But
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)
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 names
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
--
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
On Sat, 23 Jul 2011 16:59:14 +0100
Hans-Peter Diettrich drdiettri...@aol.com 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
--
Mattias Gaertner schrieb:
On Sat, 23 Jul 2011 16:59:14 +0100
Hans-Peter Diettrich drdiettri...@aol.com 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
35 matches
Mail list logo
