[Issue 648] DDoc: unable to document mixin statement
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=648 --- Comment #19 from github-bugzi...@puremagic.com 2014-03-12 13:25:07 PDT --- Commits pushed to master at https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/18ef6ab1eccee2883cb88fd6f36887d394b3c89f Fixes Issue 648 - Document template mixin instantiations. https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/fe5b9c1e0edd5d0790a69cb05d2a613cbd7ab5c7 Merge pull request #1485 from AndrejMitrovic/Fix648_2 Issue 648 - Document template mixin instantiations. -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 648] DDoc: unable to document mixin statement
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=648 Andrej Mitrovic andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|REOPENED|RESOLVED Version|D1 D2 |D2 Resolution||FIXED -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 648] DDoc: unable to document mixin statement
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=648 Robert Schadek rburn...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||rburn...@gmail.com --- Comment #16 from Robert Schadek rburn...@gmail.com 2014-01-04 06:30:01 PST --- Any progress on this? This is a real show-stopped for my std.logger. --- Comment #17 from Andrej Mitrovic andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com 2014-02-16 08:40:16 PST --- (In reply to comment #16) Any progress on this? This is a real show-stopped for my std.logger. The pull is up to date, and almost ready to be merged. -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 648] DDoc: unable to document mixin statement
https://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=648 --- Comment #18 from Robert Schadek rburn...@gmail.com 2014-02-16 11:55:30 PST --- (In reply to comment #17) (In reply to comment #16) Any progress on this? This is a real show-stopped for my std.logger. The pull is up to date, and almost ready to be merged. awesome. this is blocking my std.logger development. thank you -- Configure issuemail: https://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 648] DDoc: unable to document mixin statement
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=648 --- Comment #9 from github-bugzi...@puremagic.com 2013-01-14 11:56:55 PST --- Commits pushed to master at https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/a671cb3480d68201e868adf5f103fff95574a597 Fixes Issue 648 - Expand template mixins in ddoc. https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/33c36716ed97b67e454815565c6f21f41af51983 Merge pull request #1480 from AndrejMitrovic/Fix648 Issue 648 - Expand template mixins in ddoc -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 648] DDoc: unable to document mixin statement
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=648 --- Comment #10 from github-bugzi...@puremagic.com 2013-01-14 12:33:10 PST --- Commit pushed to dmd-1.x at https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/00bc154aa5bbe3bbad72906edbfa6ab8caf0fc6a fix Issue 648 - DDoc: unable to document mixin statement -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 648] DDoc: unable to document mixin statement
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=648 Walter Bright bugzi...@digitalmars.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED CC||bugzi...@digitalmars.com Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #11 from Walter Bright bugzi...@digitalmars.com 2013-01-14 13:44:12 PST --- The string mixin issue isn't fixed, but that is issue 2420. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 648] DDoc: unable to document mixin statement
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=648 Andrej Mitrovic andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED Resolution|FIXED | --- Comment #12 from Andrej Mitrovic andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com 2013-01-14 13:47:36 PST --- It's not fixed. The revert should have been done in full because of the uncaught bug, instead you created your own fixup of my pull and now master is failing: http://d.puremagic.com/test-results/ You should revert everything and allow me to work on the fix again. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 648] DDoc: unable to document mixin statement
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=648 --- Comment #13 from Walter Bright bugzi...@digitalmars.com 2013-01-14 14:09:56 PST --- reverted. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 648] DDoc: unable to document mixin statement
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=648
Jacob Carlborg d...@me.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||d...@me.com
--- Comment #14 from Jacob Carlborg d...@me.com 2013-01-14 23:27:29 PST ---
I think this would be useful to have. For example:
/// doc
class Foo
{
/// doc
mixin Singleton;
}
In this case you might want that the singleton should be documented and part of
the public API. It would be a good idea to know that Foo is a singleton.
Another example:
/// doc
class Bar
{
/// doc
mixin Property!(int, x);
}
The mixin would expand to something like:
private int x_;
@property int x () { return x_; }
@property int x (int value) { return x_ = value; }
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 648] DDoc: unable to document mixin statement
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=648 Andrej Mitrovic andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added Keywords||pull CC||andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com Platform|x86 |All Version|1.014 |D1 D2 AssignedTo|bugzi...@digitalmars.com|andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com --- Comment #8 from Andrej Mitrovic andrej.mitrov...@gmail.com 2013-01-13 12:50:59 PST --- https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/1480 This only implements template mixin statements in D2, and not string mixins. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 648] DDoc: unable to document mixin statement
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=648 Raphael Londeix raphael.lond...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||raphael.lond...@gmail.com --- Comment #7 from Raphael Londeix raphael.lond...@gmail.com 2012-03-17 11:08:55 PDT --- Hi, I would say that document mixins themselves is not really useful (like Marco Leise said, the targeted audience of the generated documentation). However, since the compiler generates documentation (which is an awesome fact btw), it could also generate doc for generated source code from mixins. When the generated code goes on a public scope, having it documented is not only useful, it is necessary. For example, I use mixin to generate some callbacks accordingly of a network protocol definition. Since the protocol is known at compile time (and fully documented), these callbacks should be documented as well. Feature or bug, I don't know, but it's not working with dmd v2.058 :) -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 648] DDoc: unable to document mixin statement
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=648
Marco Leise marco.le...@gmx.de changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||marco.le...@gmx.de
--- Comment #5 from Marco Leise marco.le...@gmx.de 2012-01-27 05:12:41 PST ---
(In reply to comment #0)
/// this is a class
class A
{
/// This mixin will bla bla bla
mixin MyMixin!();
}
this will only generate docs for the class. not the mixin.
Some will probably consider this a feature request, but I'd call it a bug...
I would call it a feature request, because for it to be a bug, there would have
to be a clear definition how this should work or a similar case that can act as
a template. DDoc documents 'classes', 'structs', 'methods', ... in other words
named symbols. mixin MyMixin; isn't a symbol and usually not interesting for
the user of the class. And private members aren't documented, because they
aren't usable by the target audience of API docs. So I assume your mixin does
not itself add public symbols that should be documented ? Or do you request a
feature to go beyond API documentation with DDOC, and also document how a mixin
is expanded in the class ? That's what normal comments are for!
Maybe you can elaborate a bit on what the mixin does and why it is necessary to
document the 'unexpanded' thing ? I would say yes, if you proposed to move DDOC
generation after mixin expansion (so newly introduced methods can be
documented), but then you could document them inside the mixin itself - which
would be a different 'bug'. Remember that a single mixin can add any number of
new symbols, so documentation above mixin ... may come short in many
situations. You can also discuss this on the D newsgroup, but be sure to give a
strong argument (real example code) for this feature.
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 648] DDoc: unable to document mixin statement
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=648
Jonas Drewsen jdrew...@gmail.com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jdrew...@gmail.com
--- Comment #2 from Jonas Drewsen jdrew...@gmail.com 2012-01-21 11:50:17 PST
---
(In reply to comment #1)
(In reply to comment #0)
/// this is a class
class A
{
/// This mixin will bla bla bla
mixin MyMixin!();
}
this will only generate docs for the class. not the mixin.
Some will probably consider this a feature request, but I'd call it a bug...
The same occurs with mixin declarations (DMD 1.014 on linux):
/// Documentation for foo.
mixin(int foo;);
mixin(int foo; /// Documentation for foo.);
And docs are not generated for foo or bar.
Gregor Richards pointed out in
news://news.digitalmars.com:119/f1m3u7$26g8$1...@digitalmars.com
that mixins are parsed much later than ddoc comments.
But I would also consider this a bug.
Comment 1 is a duplicate of bug 2420
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 648] DDoc: unable to document mixin statement
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=648 --- Comment #3 from Jonas Drewsen jdrew...@gmail.com 2012-01-21 14:18:42 PST --- https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/634 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
