Stefan Seefeld wrote:
>> But XSLT can already do that Stefan?
> As I mentioned, for me, being a developer, the documentation is embedded
> into the code, not the other way around. Thus, the file to be processed
> is primarily a source file that can readily be compiled / interpreted,
> while documentation is embedded as annotation that may be extracted.
> (This extraction is even part of the language / runtime in case of
> Python, but not in other languages such as C++ or Java.)
OK, just a different approach.
>> http://www.dpawson.co.uk/temp/genWrapper.sh.html shows the start
>> of an example.
>>
>> Have you any examples to compare Stefan?
> Any piece of java code with embedded javadoc comments, for example. Here
> is some C++ code, with embedded documentation, and cross-referenced via
> Synopsis: http://synopsis.fresco.org/sxr/Source/src/Synopsis/Buffer.hh.html
> The respective documentation is here:
> http://synopsis.fresco.org/docs/Manual/cxx/index.html.
OK, quite a different approach and usage.
> Note that this is not quite the same level of literate programming as
> you seem to aim for,
Yes,
> as I only document language artifacts themselves,
> i.e. variables, types, functions, etc., while you want to annotate
> individual statements.
Or indeed anything from a complete shell script down to commenting
on individual lines.
Thanks Stefan.
regards
--
Dave Pawson
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk
