discuss-gnustep
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: GNUstep Coding Standard Additions


From: Richard Frith-Macdonald
Subject: Re: GNUstep Coding Standard Additions
Date: Mon, 09 May 2005 06:03:04 +0100

On 2005-05-08 19:26:12 +0100 Alex Perez <aperez@student.santarosa.edu> wrote:

I agree with this, with one exception. If a class or method came from OS X, we should note when it was implemented in GNUstep, (which *release* version of base or GUI), don't you think? I think that's going to be important, going forward.

I think I missed commenting on this ... Yes, it would be nice ... I was just thinking in terms of keeping things as simple as possible, and prioritising. And my strong impression ios that people are mostly concerned with MacOS-X compatibility. However, if you are willing to root out these GNUstep version details too, I'm sure they would be useful.

Now, I guess you could just build up a table of this information, or you could edit the headers...

I plan to document it in the same place where the method documentation is, for the sake of consistency, which is not in the headers.

I'm a bit confused by the above statement ... since the documentation is generated from the headers/sourcecode. Some parts of the documentation are generated from information which is only available in the headers, other parts come from the '.m' files too. It's technically possible to use just the headers (but not possible to use solely the .m files), and some people would like to see that done, but for the moment at least we have a mix.

I *guess* you mean that you want to put stuff in the .m files rather than the .h files (since putting it in the generated output would make no sense as it would be overwritten next time documentation is generated). However, this is definitely not 'consistent' since you would *have* to put some in the headers (macros and typedefs), all the current version markup is in the headers, and some of the general documentation text is in headers. So, if you don't want to edit the headers yourself, I think a separate standalone table would be nice (as the easiest reference source for someone else to use).






reply via email to

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