"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).

- Sophie