On Wed, May 12, 2004 at 02:20:20PM -0600, William D. Neumann wrote:
> This is really, I suppose, the heart of my complaint.  It seems that a
> number of OCaml developers are relying on ocamldoc as their primary
> documentation method.  While this may work more-or-less well for a library
> like mlgmp or similar, it is woefully inadequate for documenting anything
> more substantial (e.g. applications).

I basically think of OCamlConf as a library, but agree that ocamldoc output is
not appropriate for applications.  Every time I sit down to write a user's
manual for ocamlconf (It is on the gameplan!) I end up re-hashing the inline
comments almost word-for-word.  I'm not sure the best way to write a tutorial
that is heavily hyperlinked into the code, so it just gives a friendly front-end
to the API.  I'll take a look at ocamlweb; I'm curious about literate programming
but usually find that the ordering necessary in prose is inconvenient for code.

Kenn

-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners