Talin wrote:
/*
Plot a point at position x, y.
'x' - The x-coordinate.
'y' - The y-coordinate.
*/
void Plot( int x, int y );
The scanner should note that: 'x' and 'y' are in single-quotes, so they
probably refer to code identifiers.
or maybe they're
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Andrew In such autogenerated documentation, you wind up with a list of
Andrew every single class and function, and both trivial and important
Andrew classes are given exactly the same emphasis.
I find this true where I work as well. Doxygen is used as
Guido van Rossum wrote:
On 9/29/06, A.M. Kuchling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Sep 29, 2006 at 09:49:35AM +0900, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What is lost according to him is information about how the elements of
a module work together. The docstrings tend to be narrowly focused on
the
On 29-sep-2006, at 4:24, Greg Ewing wrote:
An example of a good way to do it is the original Inside
Macintosh series. Each chapter started with a narrative-style
About this module kind of section, that introduced the
relevant concepts and explained how they fitted together,
without going into
Andrew In such autogenerated documentation, you wind up with a list of
Andrew every single class and function, and both trivial and important
Andrew classes are given exactly the same emphasis.
I find this true where I work as well. Doxygen is used as a documentation
generation
Simon Brunning wrote:
The How to use this module sections sound like /F's The Python
Standard Library, of which I keep the dead tree version on my desk
and the PDF vesion on my hard drive for when I'm coding in the pub. It
or something like it would be a superb addition to the (already very
On 9/29/06, A.M. Kuchling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Sep 29, 2006 at 09:49:35AM +0900, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What is lost according to him is information about how the elements of
a module work together. The docstrings tend to be narrowly focused on
the particular function or
If there are rampant criticisms of the Python docs, then those that
are complaining should take specific examples of their complaints to the
sourceforge bug tracker and submit documentation patches for the
relevant sections. And personally, I've not noticed that criticisms of
the Python docs
BJörn Lindqvist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If there are rampant criticisms of the Python docs, then those that
are complaining should take specific examples of their complaints to the
sourceforge bug tracker and submit documentation patches for the
relevant sections. And personally, I've
On 9/29/06, BJörn Lindqvist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If there are rampant criticisms of the Python docs, then those that are complaining should take specific examples of their complaints to the sourceforge bug tracker and submit documentation patches for the
relevant sections.And personally,
Josiah Carlson wrote:
BJörn Lindqvist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If there are rampant criticisms of the Python docs, then those that
are complaining should take specific examples of their complaints to the
sourceforge bug tracker and submit documentation patches for the
relevant sections. And
There are a lot reports on the lousy state of python docs. I'm not
much in the python community so i don't know what the developers are
doing anything about it.
anyway, i've rewrote the Python's RE module documentation, at:
http://xahlee.org/perl-python/python_re-write/lib/module-re.html
xah lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There are a lot reports on the lousy state of python docs. I'm not
much in the python community so i don't know what the developers are
doing anything about it.
I don't know about everyone else, but when I recieve comments like the
docs are lousy, fix
Josiah Carlson writes:
fine). While I have heard comments along the lines of the docs could
be better, I've never heard the claim that the Python docs are lousy.
FYI, I have heard this, recently, from Tom Lord (aka developer of
Arch, rx, guile, etc). Since he also took a swipe at Emacsen,
xah lee writes:
anyway, i've rewrote the Python's RE module documentation, at:
http://xahlee.org/perl-python/python_re-write/lib/module-re.html
-1
The current docs could be improved (but not by me, at least not
today), but I don't consider the general direction of Xah's edits
desirable.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
xah lee writes:
anyway, i've rewrote the Python's RE module documentation, at:
http://xahlee.org/perl-python/python_re-write/lib/module-re.html
-1
The current docs could be improved (but not by me, at least not
today), but I don't consider the general
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sep 28, 2006, at 8:49 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What is lost according to him is information about how the elements of
a module work together. The docstrings tend to be narrowly focused on
the particular function or variable, and too often
Barry Warsaw wrote:
There's also the pull between wanting to write reference docs for
those who know what they've forgotten (I love that phrase!) and
writing the introductory or how it hangs together documentation.
The trick to this, I think, is not to try to make the same
piece of
18 matches
Mail list logo
