Ric wrote:
>Hi Scott,
>The answer is yes. At least in my mind!
>Unfortunately I haven't made as much progress on this as I'd have liked.
>The types/datetime addon is documented according to current joxygen
Ah, OK. I'll follow the conventions, which seem pretty straightforward to me
(Lush had a s
Hi Scott,
The answer is yes. At least in my mind!
Unfortunately I haven't made as much progress on this as I'd have liked.
The types/datetime addon is documented according to current joxygen
conventions
Types
Hello:
Is joxygen going to be the preferred way of documenting addons moving
forward? I h
Hello:
Is joxygen going to be the preferred way of documenting addons moving forward?
I have a few interesting addons brewing, and am missing the literate
programming toolchain which exists in R. If joxygen integration is on its way,
I'd like to be ready for it (and would be happy to pitch in to
