Mars0i <marsh...@logical.net> writes: >> - Add hyperlinks >> - Distinguish between symbols (or names of vars) and normal words. >> - Distinguish between code (examples) and normal words >> - Have access to basic "markdown" style typography. >> >> Less trivial things that I would like to be able to do: >> - transclude documentation from secondary files, so that the developer >> of a piece of code sees a short piece of documentation, while users >> of code can see something longer. >> - expand the documentation system as I see fit; i.e. the documentation >> system should be designed to an abstraction, not an implementation. >> > > To me all of this seems reasonable, especially the first group of items. > None of the ones in the first group, at least, require immediate changes to > existing docstrings.
They do, IF they are to be machine interpretable. Emacs docstrings using `this' convention to identify other function or variable names. I can use this convention in my clojure docstrings. In emacs, the help system can make these hyperlinkable. Clojure won't. To have this work, we need a minimal standard. Nothing more complex, but at least that. Phil -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
