Hi, Given the current interest, I am raising the issue of GTExample again. I sent a while ago a thorough description of the current solution: http://gtoolkit.org/doc/Examples/examples.html The goal is to provide documentation for all methods and classes both by allowing simple examples (plain unary methods) and offering the potential of doing more than just simple things. Except for Nicolai, there was no other feedback. Is there an interest to have a conversation about it? Cheers, Doru
On Sep 15, 2016, at 8:40 PM, stepharo <stepharo@free.fr> wrote:
Would you highlight all string in all code as if it contained code? Or would you add this just for Pragmas? But even there, strings are string, not code. and then? you try and if it failed then in not code and you do not highlight it. KISS. No? I think we can conclude that pragmas are not a good solution to the problem, as they are far too limited to express code. I second that. Furthermore, typical examples require more than one liners, and these should be factored out separately.
I'm talking about
basename "Returns the base of the basename, i.e. /foo/gloops.taz basename is 'gloops.taz' / basename is '/'"
I do not think that it makes sense to have a separate example for this. Because you want to read everything
I do not see why the following would not work. basename "Returns the base of the basename" <expr: '''/foo/gloops.taz'' asFileReference basename' result: 'gloops.taz'>
Now I hate the extra ' for strings. We should invent a syntax to be put inside comments and that we can easily parse because we need to improve the use and discovery of the library.
basename "Returns the base of the basename" " '/foo/gloops.taz' asFileReference basename
'gloops.taz' "
I cannot not do anything and just complain that our methods are not that well documented. We as a community should take this and build an super cool system.
Stef
-- www.tudorgirba.com www.feenk.com "Innovation comes in the least expected form. That is, if it is expected, it already happened."