On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 09:17:13AM -0400, John Gabriele wrote:
> > You can also make the argument that you're being distracted by the way
> > the code is laid out. If you are documenting completely separately,
> > you can think about the flow of text that makes most sense, grouping
> > procedures
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 4:45 PM, Peter Bex wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 04:52:45PM -0300, Stephen Eilert wrote:
>> > Almost all the "extracted" documentation I've seen is of shitty quality;
>> > people tend to use automatic extraction of docs as an excuse not to
>> > write proper documentation
On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 10:55:55PM -0500, Paul Nelson wrote:
> I'm back!
>
> Things have been busy for me lately, keeping me from playing with Chicken
> Scheme and with qwiki but I finally got a little time tonight. While I have
> been able to successfully install qwiki and get the first page
Hello,
>
> Documentation for eggs is usually manually written. As far as I know,
> nobody uses automatic extraction of comments from code.
>
Look at the contracts egg. Using it, you will not only get automatic
documentation of your modules but also a simple version of "Design by
Contract" inv
* Nick Gasson [110316 21:30]:
> > It's here: http://paste.lisp.org/display/120567
> >
> > The line that seems to cause the issue is 69 - (define (imag-part z) (apply-
> > generic 'imag-part z))
> >
> > It's odd because there are very similar (currently commented) lines around
> > it
> > which
