Damon Chaplin wrote: > On Wed, 2007-05-02 at 01:12 +0100, Rob Taylor wrote: >> Michael Lawrence wrote: > >>> I made some suggestions along those lines a while ago on the GtkDocFuture >>> page: http://live.gnome.org/DocumentationProject/GtkDocFuture. It's at the >>> bottom of the page. > > I'm not sure I like the idea of the gtk-doc comments containing extra > tags for return values and arguments. It could get pretty messy.
Agreed. > >> Yeah, hmm, my take is that the introspection data should live in the >> code, and gtk-doc should pick these up for the docs (just like signals >> and object hierarchy). I'll be able to tell more after hashing out my >> prototype. One point I'm interested in from that POV: are there any >> plans for gtk-doc to document signals/properties on interfaces? (e.g. by >> instantiating objects pretending to implement them?) > > gtk-doc documents signals/properties on interfaces already. > Ah good! I had the impression it didn't ATM :) Thanks, Rob Taylor _______________________________________________ gtk-devel-list mailing list gtk-devel-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list