[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Scheme file docstring format
From: |
Neil Jerram |
Subject: |
Re: Scheme file docstring format |
Date: |
18 Feb 2001 20:14:30 +0000 |
>>>>> "Michael" == Michael Livshin <address@hidden> writes:
Michael> er. what was the point of moving the docstrings into the
Michael> comments, again?
I think that the biggest reasons are internationalization and
occupancy.
Michael> I'd rather we figured out a way to fix the normal
Michael> docstrings, instead of duplicating the module system
Michael> logic in snarfer scripts etc.
As I've said elsewhere, I don't understand why we need to duplicate
any module system logic in snarfer scripts.
Michael> the "documentation is part of the code" property of Lispy
Michael> languages was always one of my favourite features.
Do you really mean as a language feature, or as a feature of the
development environment?
Best regards,
Neil
- Re: Scheme file docstring format, (continued)
- Re: Scheme file docstring format, Martin Grabmueller, 2001/02/17
- Re: Scheme file docstring format, Marius Vollmer, 2001/02/18
- Re: Scheme file docstring format, Keisuke Nishida, 2001/02/22
- Re: Scheme file docstring format, thi, 2001/02/18
- Re: Scheme file docstring format, Michael Livshin, 2001/02/18
- Re: Scheme file docstring format,
Neil Jerram <=
- Re: Scheme file docstring format, Michael Livshin, 2001/02/19
- Re: Scheme file docstring format, Neil Jerram, 2001/02/19
- Re: Scheme file docstring format, Carl R. Witty, 2001/02/20
- Re: Scheme file docstring format, Neil Jerram, 2001/02/20
- Re: Scheme file docstring format, Michael Livshin, 2001/02/21
- Re: Scheme file docstring format, Martin Grabmueller, 2001/02/21
- Re: Scheme file docstring format, Michael Livshin, 2001/02/21
Re: Scheme file docstring format, Neil Jerram, 2001/02/18