On 03/05/12 12:30, Thiago Macieira wrote: > There's also another option, which is to have a "Qt developers documentation", > probably matching the next unreleased version of Qt. That way, we, the > developers, can easily locate the source code when proof-reading our > documentation and verify that it does what it says it should do. That sounds like a great idea. A developer-doc that would complement the official one with implementation specifics would be a fine resource, and I guess it wouldn't need to affect the official one, although I don't see the harm in 1 discrete link per class pointing to the developer-doc alter ego.
> IMHO, the developer documentation should be in the code, like for > QSharedPointer. Completely agree. Nothing worse than out-of-sync documentation. Also, this approach might be a good solution for QPA, as that is of no relevance to normal developers, but should definitely have its place somewhere to further clarify the platform plugin development process. Regards, Pierre _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
