In my autodoc, I have the following:
/*! @decl typedef int|string Foo *! *! Blah blah blah. */
In the HTML pages however, it comes out as
Typedef Foo
Missing content ()
Description
Blah blah blah.
Why does it say "Missing content ()" instead of "typedef int|string Foo"? It is me or AutoDoc who is doing something wrong?
Autodoc was done before typedefs and enums were introduced.
/ Martin Nilsson (Fake Build Master)
Previous text:
2002-11-19 18:05: Subject: Autodoc
In my autodoc, I have the following:
/*! @decl typedef int|string Foo *! *! Blah blah blah. */
In the HTML pages however, it comes out as
Typedef Foo
Missing content ()Description
Blah blah blah.Why does it say "Missing content ()" instead of "typedef int|string Foo"? It is me or AutoDoc who is doing something wrong?
/ Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!)
Hardly. There is a "Typedef" class in PikeObjects.pike, and as you can see the heading says that the identifier has been identified as a Typedef. If I type "smurf" instead of "typedef", the heading says Variable instead:
Variable int
smurf Subversion.int
Description
Blah blah blah.
/ Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!)
Previous text:
2002-11-19 18:06: Subject: Autodoc
Autodoc was done before typedefs and enums were introduced.
/ Martin Nilsson (Fake Build Master)
Then I'm out of ideas. I am fairly sure AutoDoc is to blame though.
/ Martin Nilsson (Fake Build Master)
Previous text:
2002-11-19 18:08: Subject: Autodoc
Hardly. There is a "Typedef" class in PikeObjects.pike, and as you can see the heading says that the identifier has been identified as a Typedef. If I type "smurf" instead of "typedef", the heading says Variable instead:
Variable int
smurf Subversion.intDescription
Blah blah blah./ Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!)
Yes. The XML looks like this, which seems ok, so I assume it's the HTML formatter that does something wrong:
<docgroup homogen-type='typedef' homogen-name='Foo'><doc><text><p>Blah blah blah.</p> </text></doc> <typedef name='Foo'><source-position file='?' first-line='29'/><type><or><int/><string/></or></type></typedef> </docgroup>
On a slightly related subject, is it possible to have autodoc interleaved with code without losing the current @decl context?
/ Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!)
Previous text:
2002-11-19 18:12: Subject: Autodoc
Then I'm out of ideas. I am fairly sure AutoDoc is to blame though.
/ Martin Nilsson (Fake Build Master)
On a slightly related subject, is it possible to have autodoc interleaved with code without losing the current @decl context?
Not AFAIK.
/ Henrik Grubbström (Lysator)
Previous text:
2002-11-19 18:15: Subject: Autodoc
Yes. The XML looks like this, which seems ok, so I assume it's the HTML formatter that does something wrong:
<docgroup homogen-type='typedef' homogen-name='Foo'><doc><text><p>Blah blah blah.</p> </text></doc> <typedef name='Foo'><source-position file='?' first-line='29'/><type><or><int/><string/></or></type></typedef>
</docgroup>
On a slightly related subject, is it possible to have autodoc interleaved with code without losing the current @decl context?
/ Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!)
The autodoc extractor does as far as I know support typedefs, but it might be that the formatter doesn't.
/ Henrik Grubbström (Lysator)
Previous text:
2002-11-19 18:05: Subject: Autodoc
In my autodoc, I have the following:
/*! @decl typedef int|string Foo *! *! Blah blah blah. */
In the HTML pages however, it comes out as
Typedef Foo
Missing content ()Description
Blah blah blah.Why does it say "Missing content ()" instead of "typedef int|string Foo"? It is me or AutoDoc who is doing something wrong?
/ Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!)
pike-devel@lists.lysator.liu.se
-
Henrik Grubbstr�m (Lysator) ＠ Pike (-) developers forum -
Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!) ＠ Pike (-) developers forum
-
Martin Nilsson (Fake Build Master) ＠ Pike (-) developers forum