Browse thread
Not Rocket Science
-
Jon Harrop
-
Adrien
-
Oliver Bandel
- Oliver Bandel
- Jon Harrop
-
Oliver Bandel
- Richard Jones
- Markus Mottl
-
Adrien
[
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: | 2008-03-03 (09:03) |
From: | Oliver Bandel <oliver@f...> |
Subject: | Re: documentation (Re: Re : [Caml-list] Not Rocket Science) |
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