From: "Eric Pouech" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> and how do you deal of MSDN docs evolving ? I'm not even speaking of
> evolution because of new features, but MSDN gets updated from questions
> asked on the KB.
It's true. For this reason I've clearly marked on the common controls
the date and exact ver
Dimi Paun wrote:
On Mon, 2005-11-14 at 03:32 -0600, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
The only way to know that something is done is to write a test case
for it and check the behavior against Windows. MSDN cannot be trusted,
and marking code as DONE just because it follows what happens to be in
the doc
On Mon, 2005-11-14 at 03:32 -0600, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> The only way to know that something is done is to write a test case
> for it and check the behavior against Windows. MSDN cannot be trusted,
> and marking code as DONE just because it follows what happens to be in
> the doc today is ver
Dimi Paun <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> With one exception: knowing that something is complete as far as
> documentation allows us to know is rather important. This is a
> fairly immutable point in the development of a function, and having
> reliable information about that is golden. Otherwise, on
On Sun, 2005-11-13 at 13:31 -0600, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
>
> It's a rough estimate, but it has the advantage of not requiring code
> changes. Adding special comments all over the place is going to be a
> lot of work, maintaining them properly will be even more work (and
> most likely won't hap
Hi Alexandre,
On Sunday 13 November 2005 20:31, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> If you want to measure the quality of the implementation a much better
> way IMO is to measure regression test coverage. This may also motivate
> people to write more tests, which would do a lot more good than
> spending t
Michael Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In my opinion it's not a good idea to interpret the absence of stub or
> semi-stub as 'implemented': I guess very few of wine's APIs would be
> considered implemented, yet most of them don't have a 'stub' or 'semi-stub'
> annotation. This would lead to
Hi James,
On Saturday 12 November 2005 02:52, James Hawkins wrote:
> The proposed method is superfluous and adds unnecessary words to the
> docs and source. You really don't get any extra information by
> labeling a function as sketchy or substantial. It's dangerous to
> label a function as revi
Am Samstag, den 12.11.2005, 01:52 + schrieb James Hawkins:
> need to change c2man to parse the FIXMEs at the beginning for the word
> 'stub' or 'semi-stub'. They are already in most functions, and it
> would be beneficial to add them to the rest.
I have seen most stubs at the end of the form
On Sat, 2005-11-12 at 01:44 +0100, Markus Amsler wrote:
> I like the states from Michael, and the short @-notation from ReactOS.
> The implementation status is just a flag, writting a whole section is
> IMO an overkill. Any agreements on this proposal:
>
> @-notation, 5 states:
I think this notat
On 11/12/05, Markus Amsler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> @-notation, 5 states:
>
> @unimplemented (=STUBBED)
> @skechty
> @substantial
> @implemented(=COMPLETE)
> @reviewed
>
The proposed method is superfluous and adds unnecessary words to the
docs and source. You really don't get any extra
Hi,
Michael Jung wrote:
Something like 'IMPLEMENTATION STATUS', which would document the
author's opinion on how complete the implementation of a given API is. We
could introduce a classification scheme similar to:
STUBBED: Well, stubbed.
SKETCHY: Implemented just enough to make a sp
Hi,
On 11/10/05, Michael Jung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello everybody,
>
> talking to David Gümbel today the idea came up that it might be worth it to
> introduce an additional section in the comments that document the exported
> APIs. Something like 'IMPLEMENTATION STATUS', which would docum
Hello everybody,
talking to David Gümbel today the idea came up that it might be worth it to
introduce an additional section in the comments that document the exported
APIs. Something like 'IMPLEMENTATION STATUS', which would document the
author's opinion on how complete the implementation of a
14 matches
Mail list logo
