search

smartcaveman / runsharp-google-export

Automatically exported from code.google.com/p/runsharp
MIT License
0 stars 0 forks source link

Create code documentation #1

Open GoogleCodeExporter opened 9 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Doc comments must be added to all public interfaces

Original issue reported on code.google.com by StefanSi...@gmail.com on 16 Oct 2009 at 7:58

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

Original comment by StefanSi...@gmail.com on 16 Oct 2009 at 8:05

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
The most important thing is the comments on the classes, interfaces and member 
variables (as opposed to the methods). We can look at a method and see what it 
does easily enough, but in any given project I find it's hard to tell what any 
given class or field is for. UML/class diagrams are also helpful! Luckily, in 
the case of RunSharp, I can tell a lot of how it works by stepping through a 
debugger.

I see calls like g.Arg(0, "args"); are gone from this build, in favor of 
Parameter(). I guess the CodeProject article will need revising too.

Original comment by qwertie...@gmail.com on 13 Aug 2010 at 10:37

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Hi qwertie256,

I'm really sorry that these things are not done yet, but it unfortunately all 
comes down to how much spare time I can find for this project, which is zero 
for now and the foreseeable future.

Regarding the g.Arg(...) thing - that was something I really disliked in the 
first release, because it was conceptually completely wrong (although it looks 
convenient at the first glance) to define formal parameter names via a code 
generator class. It also introduces 'magic constants' (the parameter indices) 
to the code, something I'm trying to avoid at all costs.

Best Regards,
Stefan

Original comment by StefanSi...@gmail.com on 17 Aug 2010 at 6:32

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Well, if you find time to do one thing, let it be an updated CodeProject 
article. I imagine that's what everybody reads before they try to use RunSharp. 
And how about that g.Do() method I suggested?

Original comment by qwertie...@gmail.com on 2 Nov 2010 at 6:19

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
By the way, I finished the library I was writing based on RunSharp (a thing for 
automatically reading and writing structures in files, sort of like C's fread() 
and fwrite() except that it supports big-endian or little-endian, 
variable-length arrays, etc.)

Original comment by qwertie...@gmail.com on 2 Nov 2010 at 6:23