Hi, First of all, I want to point out that I don't want to advocate against ALLPROSE for documentation, which is in fact an interesting development framework. Nevertheless, my contribution do the documentation discussion is non-ALLPROSE. Did you consider using an "javadoc" style for documentation. E.g. doxygen is a mature and flexible tool aimed primary at C++ but extended to some more languages. The output formats include html, latex, and rtf. Furthermore, doxygen can be "easily" extended by using a preprocessor. I used a simple (and short) perl script to generate a doxygen documentation for a bunch of VHDL source files (VHDL is a language for hardware description of digital circuits) by mapping part of the VHDL syntax to C++. In terms of documentation, the Axiom Types correspond to C++ objects. Furthermore, both languages have public exports and private functions, ...
In my opinion, this is _not_ an out-of-the-box solution, yet worth considering. Regards, Gernot On Mon, 2006-08-21 at 20:10 -0400, Page, Bill wrote: > On Monday, August 21, 2006 1:08 PM Martin Rubey wrote: > > > > > I wrote: > > > > In fact, I think it's high time to switch to ALLPROSE. As > > > > far as I know, the only bit missing is to make it talk to > > > > axiom instead of aldor, but that shouldn't be too difficult, > > > > Ralf? > > Bill Page wrote: > > > :) I have read the ALLPROSE documentation but it is not at > > > all clear to me how this could be done. Perhaps you can > > > elaborate on this idea? > > ... > > Result: Generating documentation doesn't seem to be very > > difficult at all. The main obstacle is, that ALLPROSE expects > > a semicolon to end a definition. Thus, I cheated and wrote: > > > > <<exports: testSPAD>>= > > double: R -> R --; > > @ > > > > It seems that ALLPROSE also expects that the signature > > appears on one line, Ralf? At least > > > > <<exports: testSPAD>>= > > double: R -> _ > > R --; > > @ > > > > did not work. > > > > The main principle obstacle however is pile syntax (sorry > > Bill). It does not mix well with neither .pamphlet_s nor > > .nw_s: > > (: No problem. :) > > What is ".pamphlet_s nor .nw_s"? > > > > > Continuing with > > > > <<exports: testSPAD>>= > > triple: R -> R --; > > @ > > > > Will produce an error, of course. But I guess, we have to > > live with that problem anyway. > > > > To deal with pile syntax maybe we could make use of the > SPAD to Aldor translation option built into Axiom that > you mentioned in another thread? Even if it is not perfect, > perhaps it is good enough to enable ALLPROSE to more easily > extract the necessary information? > > > For compiling, we would have to change the extension .as to > > .spad and change calls to aldor to axiom. This is beyond my > > knowledge of allprose though. > > >From my point of view the objectives of using ALLPROSE are a > little different than the objectives satisfied by the Axiom > pamphlet files. As I understand it, one of the main points > is to be able to extract the comments embedded in the Aldor/SPAD > source code and typeset it along with other parts of the > documentation that are just LaTeX segments of the pamphlet > file. And also to create appropriate hyperlinks to this stuff. > Is that right? In that case, in the end will it be at least > a partial replacement for the hyperdoc browser? > > I think we need to talk more about how this would work both > in a stand alone desktop environment and on the Axiom Wiki. > > Regards, > Bill Page. > > > _______________________________________________ > Axiom-developer mailing list > Axiom-developer@nongnu.org > http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/axiom-developer -- DI Gernot Hueber Johannes-Kepler Universtität Institut für Integrierte Schaltungen Altenbergerstr. 69 4040 Linz Tel +43 732 2468 7120 Fax +43 732 2468 7126 Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web www.riic.at _______________________________________________ Axiom-developer mailing list Axiom-developer@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/axiom-developer