Browse thread
Re: [Caml-list] Re: [Caml-announce] OCamldoc
- Benjamin C. Pierce
[
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: | 2001-10-10 (15:39) |
From: | Benjamin C. Pierce <bcpierce@s...> |
Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] Re: [Caml-announce] OCamldoc |
> > Is there *anyone* that wants to write > > > > (* Comment for f *) > > val f : t > > (* Comment for g *) > > val g : t' > > You mean, anyone who normally, when writing programs, either puts the > comment before the thing being commented, or > > val f : t (* Comment for f *) > val g : t' (* Comment for g *) > > on the same line as the thing being commented? No, I meant, anyone who writes comments before the thing that they refer to *and* indented more than the thing that follows them. My proposed rule if the comment is on a line by itself, then if its indentation is the same as the following (non-comment) line then it goes with the following else it goes with the preceding else it goes with the line it's on. handles your style just fine, I think. The idea was to support all three "natural" styles, i.e. (** comment for f *) val f : t val f : t (** comment for f *) val f : t (** comment for f *) without the need for any funny markers. B ------------------- 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