Commenting class category
itsme213 at hotmail.com
Mon Feb 11 02:16:53 UTC 2008
"Keith Hodges" <keith_hodges at yahoo.co.uk> wrote
> Your suggestion of Documentation classes comes but one month after I
> suggested the very same.
Newbie alert .... Why not make package and class-category proper objects
with their own documentation? Is it too far-reaching a change? Or would MC
not handle them since they are not classes or methods? Do those who know the
Squeak image well think that would be a bad move? Are there some other good
reasons to not go that route? All of the above? :-)
> Since each class in squeak may nominate its
> #compilerClass and #parserClass it is possible to override these in such
> a way as to ignore the method text.
Would that be needed? If these "documentation classes" are used as pure
"comment-holders", one for each package & class category, would the
class-comment field not suffice? The creation dialog for package / category
could directly require a non-empty package/category doc string in addition
to the name, creating the comment-holder class with some standard name
behind the scenes (always editable later in that class' comment).
More information about the Squeak-dev