Richard D. Jackson wrote:
But if there's only one comment at the top, put them in one section all together:
const { Foreground and background color constants } Black = 0; Blue = 1; Green = 2; Cyan = 3; Red = 4; Magenta = 5; Brown = 6; LightGray = 7;
Of course, in the indices, there should be entries for each of them.
Now this is tricky:
- What do you call the node/section for this list of vars/functions
ect...?
Indeed ...
- You can't just assume that because there is not a comment that it
belongs to what was above. If you do what happens for those cases where I haven't finshed writing the documentation for my code?
Well, user's fault. ;-) They can put in an empty comment if just for that, hmm?
Of course, any new `const', `type' or `var' block should also break the node.
I'm thinking that to solve this we are going to need a group command. Something like {@group group name} .... {@end group } Where 'group name' would be the name used for the section/node.
Might be a way to go.
And Yes I agree that every item needs to be placed in the index but what happens in the case where you don't want them all in the index. maybe a option to the @group command.
Yes, perhaps. Or perhaps a little more general, an indicator that something (whether in a group or not) should not go to the index, or not appear in the documentation at all (`{@undocumented}'?). If expect it to be used very rarely, and still wonder if it's needed at all (in either case), but it probably can't hurt to have it available.
Frank