Nikita Karetnikov skribis:
> --- a/guix/scripts/hash.scm
> +++ b/guix/scripts/hash.scm
> @@ -30,6 +30,41 @@
> #:export (guix-hash))
>
>
> +;;; Commentary:
> +;;
> +;; @node Invoking guix hash
> +;; @section Invoking @command{guix hash}
> +;;
> +;; The @command{guix hash} command allows to
> I wouldn’t want to automatically extract command-line doc. First,
> because --help needs to be concise, whereas the manual can give
> additional details (compare ‘guix package --help’ and “Invoking guix
> packages”.) Second, because the manual should include cross-references
> and examples to m
ive
additional details (compare ‘guix package --help’ and “Invoking guix
packages”.) Second, because the manual should include cross-references
and examples to make things more understandable.
> So it's only necessary to represent this information using docstrings
> and commentary (i.e.
ach; each module has its own node:
"Invoking guix-daemon," "Invoking guix package," and so forth.
So it's only necessary to represent this information using docstrings
and commentary (i.e., a module-level documentation).
Could you explore the possibilities of the literate progra
Nikita Karetnikov skribis:
> Here is what I found yesterday: [1,2]. Those (texinfo ...) modules
> provide various functions to generate html, pdf, and info from a single
> source file.
[...]
> [1]
> http://wingolog.org/archives/2004/07/25/literate-programming-with-guile
>> What do you think about literate programming [1,2,3]?
> I don’t think it’s appropriate here. We have (or should have) user doc
> for command-line tools, a manual for the API, as well as an on-line
> reference in the form of docstrings; the code itself is reasonably
> comme
Nikita Karetnikov skribis:
> What do you think about literate programming [1,2,3]?
I don’t think it’s appropriate here. We have (or should have) user doc
for command-line tools, a manual for the API, as well as an on-line
reference in the form of docstrings; the code itself is reasona
What do you think about literate programming [1,2,3]?
I've never tried it, but I like the idea. WEB and Noweb look a bit
outdated, but there is also Babel [4,5,6].
Would you like to give it a try? If so, we can start with
'guix-package' and 'guix-build' because they ar
