[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Public methods description should be in header files

From: Adam Fedor
Subject: Re: Public methods description should be in header files
Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2002 13:24:19 -0600
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux ppc; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020610

Richard Frith-Macdonald wrote:

1. (This one I strongly believe myself) If the source comments for the
documentation are stored in the .m rather than the .h files, library developers (working on the GNUstep code itself) are more likely to keep them up to date.

2. (I think a weaker reason) Removing comments from the headers should
encourage people to read the documentation, showing them that there is a
single location for reference information.  I think Adam said recently that
improving documentation should be a major aim ... so this makes sense.

Yes, all that and also to be consistant. Most of the documentation in the base and gui library is in the source (due to reason 1).

Also, perhaps this is just a personal reason: When I want to just know the name of a method, I look at the headers, but when I want to understand them, I look at the documentation and at the source just to make sure I understand everything about it.

Adam Fedor, Digital Optics Corp.      | I'm glad I hate spinach, because                    | if I didn't, I'd eat it, and you
                                      | know how I hate the stuff.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]