From: Oliver Bandel <oliver@first.in-berlin.de>
To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr
Subject: Re: documentation (Re: Re : [Caml-list] Not Rocket Science)
Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 10:03:48 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1204535028.47cbbef4afe38@webmail.in-berlin.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1204462441.47caa369bed13@webmail.in-berlin.de>
Zitat von Oliver Bandel <oliver@first.in-berlin.de>:
[...]
> IMHO the biggest necessity is better documentation.
> This also holds for a lot of OCaml-libraries, like
> Camlimages and others.
I didn't meant the standard lib...
(...but possibly, because I now know how to use them?)
>
> It's fine to have the documentation showing all
> types and values.
> It's even better to explain, what modules can plugged in in which
> other
> modules, meaning here: which types of the modules in use fit
> together.
With ocamldoc for example it is possible to show
the relations of the modules of a program, and to
show which module uses which other module.
(graphviz-output). This is a quite good idea.
To have such a thing for the way,
modules should/can be plugged together,
determined by the custom types that are provided by the modules,
would enhance readability and understanding of a documentation a lot!
I'm not sure if this should be an additional function for ocamldoc;
possibly one also could create dummy-applications that use modules
in a way, so that plug-in possibilities can be shown with ocamldoc,
when using the graphviz-option. But this are
indirections/detours/workarounds.
Possibly an new, added functionality of ocamldoc or another
application could be used here.
Or is ocamlbuild able to create such stuff?
As I so far didn't used it, maybe someone knows
if it can be used for such documentation-enhancements?
Ciao,
Oliver
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-03-03 9:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-03-02 10:41 Not Rocket Science Jon Harrop
2008-03-02 11:46 ` Re : [Caml-list] " Adrien
2008-03-02 12:54 ` documentation (Re: Re : [Caml-list] Not Rocket Science) Oliver Bandel
2008-03-03 9:03 ` Oliver Bandel [this message]
2008-03-02 14:55 ` [Caml-list] Not Rocket Science Jon Harrop
2008-03-02 13:14 ` Richard Jones
2008-03-02 23:21 ` Markus Mottl
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1204535028.47cbbef4afe38@webmail.in-berlin.de \
--to=oliver@first.in-berlin.de \
--cc=caml-list@yquem.inria.fr \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox