Even though I don't actively contribute I still hope I can put my 2
cents into here:
Of course, and by posting you are being active :)
As far as using a "fancy" looking comment system, I would vote for
it. Everything is going "web 2.0" with the "ooohhh" and "ahhh"s
(gmail is a prime exam
So is there anything I can do?
My question is, were those statistics about undocumented functions
etc. a
result of problems with PhD or a genuine reflection of functions
that are
missing documentation? My guess is the latter...
How feasible would it be to add a "to" attribute to the ver
2009/3/31 G. T. Stresen-Reuter :
> On Mar 31, 2009, at 11:04 AM, Richard Quadling wrote:
>>
>> So is there anything I can do?
>>
>> -- -
>> Richard Quadling
>
> My question is, were those statistics about undocumented functions etc. a
> result of problems with PhD or a genuine reflection of fun
On Mar 31, 2009, at 11:04 AM, Richard Quadling wrote:
So is there anything I can do?
--
-
Richard Quadling
My question is, were those statistics about undocumented functions
etc. a result of problems with PhD or a genuine reflection of
functions that are missing documentation? My gu
2009/3/26 Philip Olson :
> Greetings,
>
> I'm not really offering a solution here but will point out some problems and
> considerations after looking at:
>
> - A diff of the generated funcindex.xml versus the current in CVS
> - The function index to see which are considered undocumented in the ne
