guile-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Documentation


From: Neil Jerram
Subject: Re: Documentation
Date: 13 May 2001 10:32:50 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) Emacs/20.7

>>>>> "Rob" == Rob Browning <address@hidden> writes:

    Rob> With #{}# any other reader would just choke on the
    Rob> definition, and it would be difficult to fix (aside from just
    Rob> deleting the docs.  With either a string, or the stuff I
    Rob> think Marius had mentioned (i.e. a special form:

    Rob>   (define (foo bar) (doc :some-info ...  :some-more-info ...
    Rob> :body "\ ...)

    Rob> I believe it should be possible to just write a standard R5RS
    Rob> macro to drop (or rewrite) all the docs.

    Michael> 1) docstrings take up memory.
    >>
    Michael> I don't believe this to be a serious problem, actually.
    >>  No, but others may do, and I think we should take their
    >> opinion into consideration.

    Rob> And I think it's probably a solvable problem, at least on
    Rob> systems where we have demand paging, or can manage to put the
    Rob> documentation in optionally loadable sub-files.

Thanks for this.  There seems to be a strong consensus now that we
should include docstrings in the lambda body, and solve any memory
consequences if and when they become important.

Any thoughts on appropriate syntax for documenting values and
bindings?  In other words the analog of, in Emacs Lisp:

(defvar fill-regexp "\\([hoopy]+\\)"
  "Docstring goes here.")

Except with the additional possibility to say whether the docstring is
a property of the variable - `fill-regexp' - or the value -
"\\([hoopy]+\\)" - or perhaps specify both docstrings in the same
expression.

        Neil




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]