On Tue, 12 Dec 2017 15:11:13 + Andrew Williams said:
> Hi,
>
> I don’t know if there is much value including the graph - for non-trivial
> classes it’s very difficult to render at any readable size. My preference
> would be to remove it, the inheritance tree shows the important
> information
Hi,
I don’t know if there is much value including the graph - for non-trivial
classes it’s very difficult to render at any readable size. My preference
would be to remove it, the inheritance tree shows the important
information...
Thanks,
Andy
On Tue, 12 Dec 2017 at 14:06, Carsten Haitzler wrote
On Tue, 12 Dec 2017 10:23:23 + Andrew Williams said:
> Hi,
>
> Thanks for the feedback, much sounds like what I had hoped to add (this was
> a first pass to trim out the bulk - more layout and styling to be done).
That's cool. It's a step in a good direction then. :)
> On your first point
Hi,
Thanks for the feedback, much sounds like what I had hoped to add (this was
a first pass to trim out the bulk - more layout and styling to be done).
On your first point the question is whether this is abstract documentation
or language specific. The view that I have taken in formatting these
On Mon, 11 Dec 2017 17:37:10 + Andrew Williams said:
Looks good, but I think it's too trimmed. Maybe it's just that in every
language I know a method, function, etc. also lists its inputs and outputs
(return and argument names/types). and not having that there even in shorthand
makes it harde
Hi,
I have done some significant updates to the new API docs. The layout still
wants a little tweaking but they should be more readable than they were
before. I've trimmed the fat out of all inherited members as discussed
before.
The result is that a page like
www.enlightenment.org/develop/api/ef
