On Sat, Jun 23, 2001 at 12:10:26PM -0600, Gordon Matzigkeit wrote:
> I don't think this is insurmountable. We could simply avoid the text
> comparison for such functions, assuming that their text will be
> completely different from the source. For some functions, we can
> still do the right thing, because the comment style is:
>
> /* SHARED-COMMENT */
> PROTOTYPE-1;
> PROTOTYPE-2;
>
> and that becomes:
>
> @deftypefun PROTOTYPE-1
> @deftypefunx PROTOTYPE-1
> SHARED-COMMENT
> @end deftypefun
>
> Agreed. I think the only thing that makes us still win is the fact
> that Hurd sources follow pretty clear conventions, which we can rely
> on to give more information than typical free-form code. We don't
> need to make something completely generic, only something that is
> useful for this project and others similar to it.
>
> Cool. I look forward to seeing what you have, so I can start working,
> too. :)
>
This kind of comment is very cool! But I think could be a good thing also make them
for structs or global vars and the scripts could reletions them and could also design
a simple kind diagram. What do you think? Could be this a good idea?
bye all
--
Maurizio Boriani -- Debian developer
http://www.debian.org/%7Ebaux/
PGP key: 0xCC0FBF8F
fingerprint => E429 A37C 5259 763C 9DEE FC8B 5D61 C796 CC0F BF8F <= fingerprint
PGP signature
