Lars Ivar Igesund wrote: > Chad J wrote: > >> I was a bit annoyed by the API/Modules modality in the latter docs. >> It'd be nice if the "Modules" list became collapsible and put the API >> elements as children of each module. It seems the newer(?) version of >> the docs is collapsible, but has yet to eliminate the modality. The >> newer version is tolerable though since it doesn't just hijack the frame >> when I click on a module. It made me have to navigate back to the >> "Modules" mode every time I wanted to go to a different module. So >> yeah, forced modality here is a bad thing. I'd prefer to just get rid >> of the modality entirely and merge it all into one collapsible index. > > Not sure it is feasible to put _all_ public Tango symbols in the same tree, > JS performance seems to very quickly become a potential issue. In that case > the modality is a very acceptable workaround IMO. Feel free to work with > Aziz on it though. Or create ticket(s). >
Darn. Well alright. >> Also, it seems dil has yet to make types found in the documentation act >> as hyperlinks to their definitions or at least module of definition. >> This one is big for me. I'm hoping it's been planned. > > Not sure what you mean here -if you mean that a return type should link to > the docs of that type, then yes, that is something that we very much want > but that requires more semantic processing than dil currently has. > OK, that's pretty much what I meant. I hope we eventually get more than return type though: non-templated function args, class ancestors, etc. would be nice as well.