Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

[patch] document the "const:" and "recfield:" cross-reference syntaxes #6021

Closed
vicuna opened this issue May 25, 2013 · 1 comment
Closed

[patch] document the "const:" and "recfield:" cross-reference syntaxes #6021

vicuna opened this issue May 25, 2013 · 1 comment
Labels
bug ocamldoc
Milestone
4.01.0

Comments

@vicuna
Copy link

vicuna commented May 25, 2013

Original bug ID: 6021
Reporter: @gasche
Assigned to: @zoggy
Status: closed (set by @xavierleroy on 2015-12-11T18:21:00Z)
Resolution: fixed
Priority: normal
Severity: text
Target version: 4.01.0+dev
Fixed in version: 4.01.0+dev
Category: ocamldoc

Bug description

The following StackOverflow question "Reference a type constructor in ocamldoc"
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/16743444/referencing-a-type-constructor-in-ocamldoc/16743728
prompted me to discover the existence of the undocumented "const:" and "recfield:" syntaxes for cross-referencing, and more importantly the non-obvious typename.constname structure of the reference.

The attached patch to the OCamldoc manual expands on the present description of the cross-reference syntax {!foo}, detailing these additional fields and their expected reference syntax.

File attachments
@vicuna
Copy link
Author

vicuna commented Jul 12, 2013

Comment author: @damiendoligez

Patch reviewed and applied (rev 13892).

@vicuna vicuna closed this as completed Dec 11, 2015
@vicuna vicuna added this to the 4.01.0 milestone Mar 14, 2019
@vicuna vicuna added the bug label Mar 20, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
bug ocamldoc
Projects
None yet
Milestone
4.01.0
Development

No branches or pull requests
1 participant
@vicuna