On 5 August 2013 14:20, Waldek Hebisch wrote:
>> I think that we should get rid of noweb and declare
>> past attempt at literate programming as a failure.
>> More precisely, noweb markup is causing troubles.
>> They are not big troubles, but AFAICS we are getting
>> essentially no value from noweb so why bother with
>> it?
On 06/08/13 03:06, Bill Page wrote:
> Before giving up entirely on the goal of better documentation however
> I think we need to consider alternatives.
Some time back I started an attempt at an IDE for FriCAS
http://www.euclideanspace.com/prog/es/
There wasn't any interest so I didn't take it any further, however one part of
the
code may be of some interest here.
There is some code, shown here:
http://www.euclideanspace.com/prog/es/user/
which was intended to be a one-off pre-processor so that I could attempt to
parse
SPAD, what this pre-processor does is:
1) Go through a directory (such as fricas/src/algebra) looking for files called
*.spad.pamphlet
2) If if finds a match then create a directory of the same name.
3) Then scan through the file.
4) When it finds category, domain or package code (starting like: <<package
NONE1
NoneFunctions1>>= and ending with @) it puts them in separate .SPAD files in the
directory it has just created.
5) Everything else in the file is assumed to be modified latex and converted to
HTML.
So the end result is a directory, for each pamphlet file, containing multiple
SPAD
files and one HTML file.
(The preprossessor can also do other stuff like adding curly brackets and
substituting macroes, which you probably don't want, but that can be disabled).
I am just putting this forward as a possible stepping stone to better
documentation,
I would be happy to develop the code if you thought it might help. From here I
think
it would be good to add diagrams and make the structure more hierarchical.
I really do believe in better documentation, I would be sad if I inadvertently
contributed to a path which lead to worse documentation. I do feel that the
literate
programming movement has the right goals, its just the mechanisms that don't
work for
me. I would like FriCAS to try to enforce better documentation.
Martin
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"FriCAS -
computer algebra system" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to
address@hidden
To post to this group, send email to address@hidden
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/fricas-devel.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.