[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       koffice-devel
Subject:    Re: koffice api documentation
From:       Thomas Zander <zander () kde ! org>
Date:       2003-12-23 12:09:13
[Download RAW message or body]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Tuesday 23 December 2003 12:23, Marc Heyvaert wrote:
> Hello
>
> Yes and no,
>
> I understand your point and that of Thomas too, not
> all comments are suitable for the api documentation,
> but :
> 1. The documentation serves 2 purposes IMHO : to make
> the whole api visible (which is not the case now)
I'm not sure why you say that; all methods are in the docs, right?
Or are you concerned with private methods; since they are not (by all 
standards I know) part of the API.

> and 
> to make the 'relevant' comments visible (which isn't
> the case either, because some very important comments,
> like e.g. the different types of 'flags' are in the
> source code, but not in the docs.
The only correct answer is the answer the devopers don't want to hear; this 
means the docs have to be fixed.
It would be great if you could give a head start with this; but I'm confused 
why the docs are in such bad shape; don't the kspread developers use the 
docs? If not, why not?
Ok, because the docs are not really good :)  But, then what _do_ the kspread 
developers use to program to their own API?

- -- 
Thomas Zander
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/6DBpCojCW6H2z/QRAhFPAJ9V2VmyFDHGorTm4PS8TrJfC60P/ACdGwBq
SLXn7g6CJ/AMTd8clumKv6M=
=OAxo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
koffice-devel mailing list
koffice-devel@mail.kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/koffice-devel

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]