Re: de facto documentation tool
- From: "Brian Moelk" <bmoelk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2006 11:53:19 -0500
Time2HELP has a concept of UnitDoc files, which are separate xml fileswhich
it can synchronize against the structure of the units they document.
This way, it is possible to have UnitDocs in different languages for the
same source code and build multiple help files (you have to create one T2H
project for each help file (language) you want)
That's a nice feature indeed. The question I have now is if it can
regenerate the method/property stubs without clobbering existing
documentation. IOW, how does it manage change over time. I would hope that
it would be fine...but you never know. ;)
I believe Doc-O-Matic also has a concept of storing documentation in
external files, but I don't know the details.
I've heard the same regarding doc-o-matic. The main issue for me with these
higher end products is their price point, and for me since application help
is much more important than code help my money is going to be spent on
applications like Help and Manual, Help Scribble, etc.
and then IDE integration of these external files.
I've never seen such a beast.
Do you mean an editor which displays for each source code "item", all the
"variants" (translations) of the documentation for it?
(I've never seen that feature in this specific kind of application)
It would be nice if the IDE could pull in that help/documentation
information in some way, or let you edit it in a *separate* docked or popup
window (I personally dislike modal dialogs). However the IDE manages this
is up to the IDE and/or the plug in, that doesn't matter so much as long as:
1) documentation is available for viewing/editing; 2) documentation is
separate from code; 3) documentation stubs are regenerated from the code
itself without losing existing documentation. Perhaps, this could be
integrated into the fly-over help stuff, I'm not sure though.
--
Brian Moelk
bmoelk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.brainendeavor.com
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: de facto documentation tool
- From: Jarle Stabell
- Re: de facto documentation tool
- From: Pete Fraser
- Re: de facto documentation tool
- References:
- de facto documentation tool
- From: R. Rajesh Jeba Anbiah
- Re: de facto documentation tool
- From: Brian Moelk
- Re: de facto documentation tool
- From: Jarle Stabell
- de facto documentation tool
- Prev by Date: Re: What will happen with QC when Delphi change company?
- Next by Date: Re: Did Borland Act Fairly Releasing Delphi 2006?
- Previous by thread: Re: de facto documentation tool
- Next by thread: Re: de facto documentation tool
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|