[Mono-docs-list] Re: [Mono-dev] Monodoc
you should take a look at this: http://people.mosaix.net/chris/tutorials/monodoc/monodoc-tutorial.html and if you still have questions please post on to the monodoc mailing list only. No need to cross post. - raf On Mon, 2005-10-03 at 17:38 +0200, Matthijs ter Woord wrote: Is there any special format needed? (IE, ecma xml docs etc) If so, could anyone point me to it? Regards, Matthijs ter Woord - Original Message - From: Miguel de Icaza [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Matthijs ter Woord [EMAIL PROTECTED]; mono-docs-list@lists.ximian.com Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 30, 2005 4:20 AM Subject: Re: [Mono-dev] Monodoc Hello, When will monodoc be ready for .NET 2.0 classes? (ie, when will it also allow to document generics) We will have to wait for someone to contribute the necessary code to cope with this. I have not had much time to look into this issue. What needs to be done is: * Look at the new ECMA XML documentation from ECMA and evaluate how we could bring those changes into our documentation. * Someone would have to port the new docs nonetheless. * Someone would have to architect the changes to the monodoc engine to do so. The right place to discuss this is the mono-docs-list. That being said, if you can not wait to write some documentation, we have a *lot* of stuff in the 1.x profile that needs documentation. Considering that 2.x stuff wont be 100% supported for a while, maybe it would be best to contribute to the 1.x effort. ___ Mono-devel-list mailing list Mono-devel-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list ___ Mono-docs-list maillist - Mono-docs-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-docs-list
[Mono-docs-list] Re: [Mono-dev] Monodoc
Matthijs ter Woord wrote: Is there any special format needed? (IE, ecma xml docs etc) If so, could anyone point me to it? So the goal is to extend our XML format to handle generic classes, and that includes 1) how to include the generic part of a type/member signature in the metadata parts of the XML, and 2) how this affects see tags. (Maybe there are more things not coming to mind.) As for (1), I think we can do this however we want. Monodocer and the monodoc stylesheet would just need to be updated. For (2), we want to remain compatible with the inline documentation format Microsoft uses, for instance to be compatible with NDoc. So, what would be useful would be for someone to dig around and see if Microsoft has updated their /doc tag reference for generics. Updating monodocer means having it be compiled with gmcs so it can reflect to get generics. But, monodocer should really be changed to use Cecil (rather than reflection) first before doing this. Does anyone know how Cecil is doing? (The main reasons to not use reflection is that reflection doesn't give access to how attribute are constructed, so currently monodocer is making up something reasonable to display.) - Josh - Original Message - From: Miguel de Icaza [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Matthijs ter Woord [EMAIL PROTECTED]; mono-docs-list@lists.ximian.com Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 30, 2005 4:20 AM Subject: Re: [Mono-dev] Monodoc Hello, When will monodoc be ready for .NET 2.0 classes? (ie, when will it also allow to document generics) We will have to wait for someone to contribute the necessary code to cope with this. I have not had much time to look into this issue. What needs to be done is: * Look at the new ECMA XML documentation from ECMA and evaluate how we could bring those changes into our documentation. * Someone would have to port the new docs nonetheless. * Someone would have to architect the changes to the monodoc engine to do so. The right place to discuss this is the mono-docs-list. That being said, if you can not wait to write some documentation, we have a *lot* of stuff in the 1.x profile that needs documentation. Considering that 2.x stuff wont be 100% supported for a while, maybe it would be best to contribute to the 1.x effort. ___ Mono-docs-list maillist - Mono-docs-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-docs-list
[Mono-docs-list] Re: [Mono-dev] Monodoc
Alexandre Miguel Pedro Gomes wrote: Monodoc would need a profile chooser or something like that to switch between 1.x and 2.0 profile, right? Any plans on those things? I imagine that we'll show the 2.0 docs (at some point) but new members/types will be tagged as being introduced in 2.0. That's a really long way off, though. Btw anyone knows why the C# specification appears without newlines? Where? Mostly it displays fine for me (on the web and in monodoc). I recall that there are tables somewhere in there that aren't shown right because the column separators are gone from the source XML files. -- - Joshua Tauberer http://taubz.for.net ** Nothing Unreal Exists ** ___ Mono-docs-list maillist - Mono-docs-list@lists.ximian.com http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-docs-list
