Browse thread
[Caml-announce] OCamldoc
[
Home
]
[ Index:
by date
|
by threads
]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
| Date: | -- (:) |
| From: | Francois Pottier <francois.pottier@i...> |
| Subject: | [Caml-list] Re: [Caml-announce] OCamldoc |
Hi, > I'm pleased to announce a pre-release of OCamldoc, which i hope will > become the "javadoc for OCaml". Congratulations for this very nice piece of work. A question about comment placement: isn't it a bit inconsistent to expect comments for record fields to be placed *after* the record, while the opposite convention is used for object fields? I would consider it more consistent to always require the comment to precede the element. The purpose of the current convention concerning record fields and data constructors seems to be to encourage people to write comments that fit on the remainder on the line, which is bad practice anyway. -- François Pottier Francois.Pottier@inria.fr http://pauillac.inria.fr/~fpottier/ ------------------- Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr