Re: [DOCS] C code documentation

2004-01-24 Thread Gordon Henriksen
Dan Sugalski wrote: Michael Scott wrote: Perhaps the most controversial feature of all this is that I'm using rows of 80 '#'s as visual delimiters to distinguish documentation sections from code. Please don't. If you really, really must, chop it down to 60 or so characters. 80 may wrap in some

Re: [DOCS] C code documentation

2004-01-22 Thread Michael Scott
Yep. I bounced Sam's comment around in my head for a while until I saw that I was only putting them in for my own current convenience - makes it easier to see what I'm doing as I'm doing it - so they won't be there. Minimal is best. And anyway who wants to be "SO 20th century". Mike On 22 Jan

Re: [DOCS] C code documentation

2004-01-22 Thread Dan Sugalski
At 10:42 AM +0100 1/21/04, Michael Scott wrote: Perhaps the most controversial feature of all this is that I'm using rows of 80 '#'s as visual delimiters to distinguish documentation sections from code. Please don't. If you really, really must, chop it down to 60 or so characters. 80 may wrap in

Re: [DOCS] C code documentation

2004-01-21 Thread Sam Vilain
My vote goes for the simplest that will still parse; /* =head1 foo */ After all, arent't we all using editors that can highlight the scructure of our code to our satisfaction ? Surely even VIM et al can stick in dividers or something to make them stand out if the coder desires? I've already go

[DOCS] C code documentation

2004-01-21 Thread Michael Scott
PDD 7 "Conventions and Guidelines for Parrot Source Code" has a section on "Code Comments" that has been followed for C code. I'm about to change this. The existing documentation headers will be replaced with pod headers contained within C multi-line comment delimiters. I'm going to stick to e