Moving back to dev-platform.
On 12/17/13 4:41 PM, Gregory Szorc wrote:
> I guess what I'm trying to say is that SpiderMonkey/JavaScript appears
> lacking in the "language services" arena.
The concrete features you mentioned are extracting doc comments and
minimization, so that's what I'll address
On 12/16/2013 03:09 PM, Gregory Szorc wrote:
> Perhaps Reflect.parse() could grow a new option to expose "comment" nodes or
> could attach comment metadata to specific node types?
It's really not possible to do the latter. Comments don't appertain to
specific nodes at all. They're just random
On 12/16/2013 12:57 PM, Andrew Sutherland wrote:
The Esprima JS parser can already generate comment nodes. The API
otherwise conforms to the same output standards as SpiderMonkey's
Parser API.
There's also acorn, which is an ES5 parser written in JS that's in the
tree
(http://mxr.mozilla.or
On December 16, 2013 at 3:50:13 PM, Benjamin Smedberg (benja...@smedbergs.us)
wrote:
Is there any objection on your side to just having sphinx `mach
build-docs` push directly to MDN? If not, that seems slightly preferable
to posting them at
https://ci.mozilla.org/job/mozilla-central-docs/Tree_D
On 12/16/13, 12:50 PM, Benjamin Smedberg wrote:
On 12/16/2013 3:40 PM, Eric Shepherd wrote:
This could be a "best of both worlds" scenario that you guys could be
quite happy with.
The only reason we haven't finished implementing support for this is
that no teams have stepped up to say they'd de
On 12/16/2013 3:40 PM, Eric Shepherd wrote:
This could be a "best of both worlds" scenario that you guys could be quite
happy with.
The only reason we haven't finished implementing support for this is that no
teams have stepped up to say they'd definitely use it; once one does, I think
it wou
On December 16, 2013 at 1:21:06 PM, Gregory Szorc (g...@mozilla.com) wrote:
I agree our current mechanism for JS documentation is pretty bad. We
desire to document both the source and MDN for obvious reasons. But
nobody wants to burdened with writing docs twice. So typically in-tree
or MDN docs
On 12/16/13, 10:46 AM, Jeff Walden wrote:
On 12/16/2013 01:17 PM, Gregory Szorc wrote:
Does SpiderMonkey expose documentation blocks to the AST? If not, should it?
No, and probably not. Comments are not tokens, so they're not in the AST.
Right now SpiderMonkey pretty much just throws them a
On 12/16/2013 01:17 PM, Gregory Szorc wrote:
> Does SpiderMonkey expose documentation blocks to the AST? If not, should it?
No, and probably not. Comments are not tokens, so they're not in the AST.
Right now SpiderMonkey pretty much just throws them away (except to the extent
the comment inclu
On 16/12/13, 18:17 , Gregory Szorc wrote:
Are there any JS doc tools that can export to a machine readable format?
Does SpiderMonkey expose documentation blocks to the AST? If not, should
it?
Other parsers certainly expose comments in the AST; I don't think they
explicitly have pointers from t
On 12/16/13, 12:58 AM, Gijs Kruitbosch wrote:
From what I've been able to tell from the interwebs, extracting
documentation (autodoc-fashion) from JS/C++/IDL isn't possible with
Sphinx. Is that correct?
It is possible.
Sphinx can consume Doxygen's XML output to generate C++ docs via Breathe
From what I've been able to tell from the interwebs, extracting
documentation (autodoc-fashion) from JS/C++/IDL isn't possible with
Sphinx. Is that correct?
This makes me sad because it means I probably have to end up
copy-pasting my source code documentation elsewhere either way (in which
ca
After I announced the in-tree build docs powered by Sphinx a few months
ago [1], a few people came to me and said "that's really cool - I want
something like that for my module."
I'm pleased to announce that as of bug 939367 landing in inbound a few
hours ago, you can now deposit Sphinx docs a
13 matches
Mail list logo
