Re: [Chicken-users] egg documentation

[Alejandro Forero Cuervo]

> > What if instead of <signature type="string"> and <def type="string">
> > we simply use <string>? Would that work?
> 
> Functionally yes, but I can only think of one person who has ever
> used 'string' in an egg: myself.  In my opinion, the <def> tag
> should be there for really unusual cases such as that, since
> we can't think of every type of definition.
> 
> Check out the sqlite3-tinyclos doc for another example; Thomas thought up
> 'class' and 'method', which were not in eggdoc.  (The 'signature' type was put
> in eggdoc for just that case.)
> 
> I still think <def> is useful for unusual or unimplemented definitions, unless
> you really want to restrict people to a few major definition types (or update
> svnwiki every time someone thinks of a new one).

I think this wouldn't be very hard to do, since they would all behave
pretty much in the same way.  We can probably just keep a list with
them (ie. '(string class method)) that we add to as needed.

That is, I think you're assuming that adding new ones is hard, and I'm
just letting you know that nah, once everything is in place, it would
be rather easy. :-)

So I'll add support for <string>, <class> and <method>.

Does that sound good to you?

Alejo.
http://azul.freaks-unidos.net/