digitalmars.D.announce - DMD 0.135 release (Ddoc update)
- Walter Bright (7/7) Oct 03 2005 Another extensive update of Ddoc, www.digitalmars.com/d/ddoc.html
- Ben Hinkle (1/2) Oct 03 2005 The changelog entry for 135 is missing...
- Walter Bright (4/6) Oct 03 2005 Hmm. It was in the upload list, I wonder what happened. Anyhow, it's the...
- David L. Davis (21/28) Oct 05 2005 Walter, in the template.html there are a few places near the bottom that
- Walter Bright (3/6) Oct 05 2005 Fixed. Thanks!
- Jarrett Billingsley (14/22) Oct 13 2005 Wee!
- Walter Bright (15/26) Oct 13 2005 on
- Jarrett Billingsley (9/19) Oct 13 2005 So the semicolons are part of the symbols? That seems odd..
- Jarrett Billingsley (4/6) Oct 13 2005 I just realized something - there is no number highlighting. Will this ...
- Walter Bright (4/6) Oct 14 2005 a
- Walter Bright (17/37) Oct 14 2005 Not what I meant. I meant the text is generated from the symbol table
- Jarrett Billingsley (9/17) Oct 14 2005 Still not understanding what you mean, and the frontend is more than a m...
Another extensive update of Ddoc, www.digitalmars.com/d/ddoc.html This one adds color syntax highlighting of D code, and the ability to process any document, not just D modules. A big chunk of the D documentation was converted to using Ddoc, you can see it in the color syntax hightlighting! I hope to get back to regular bug fixing after this. http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html
Oct 03 2005
http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.htmlThe changelog entry for 135 is missing...
Oct 03 2005
"Walter Bright" <newshound digitalmars.com> "Ben Hinkle" <bhinkle mathworks.com> wrote in message news:dhs69m$2sfm$1 digitaldaemon.com...Hmm. It was in the upload list, I wonder what happened. Anyhow, it's there now.http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.htmlThe changelog entry for 135 is missing...
Oct 03 2005
In article <dhs36g$2pru$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Walter Bright says...Another extensive update of Ddoc, www.digitalmars.com/d/ddoc.html This one adds color syntax highlighting of D code, and the ability to process any document, not just D modules. A big chunk of the D documentation was converted to using Ddoc, you can see it in the color syntax hightlighting! I hope to get back to regular bug fixing after this. http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.htmlWalter, in the template.html there are a few places near the bottom that converted the '<b>' html tag to '>b<' and the '</b>' html tag to '>/b<', just thought I'd point it out. example: -------- David L. P.S. The new color-syntax looks nice! <g> ------------------------------------------------------------------- "Dare to reach for the Stars...Dare to Dream, Build, and Achieve!" ------------------------------------------------------------------- MKoD: http://spottedtiger.tripod.com/D_Language/D_Main_XP.html
Oct 05 2005
"David L. Davis" <SpottedTiger yahoo.com> wrote in message news:di10ho$12ai$1 digitaldaemon.com...Walter, in the template.html there are a few places near the bottom that converted the '<b>' html tag to '>b<' and the '</b>' html tag to '>/b<', just thought I'd point it out.Fixed. Thanks!
Oct 05 2005
"Walter Bright" <newshound digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:dhs36g$2pru$1 digitaldaemon.com...Another extensive update of Ddoc, www.digitalmars.com/d/ddoc.html This one adds color syntax highlighting of D code, and the ability to process any document, not just D modules. A big chunk of the D documentation was converted to using Ddoc, you can see it in the color syntax hightlighting! I hope to get back to regular bug fixing after this. http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.htmlWee! One thing that annoys me, though - DDoc seems to suffix a semicolon to the end of every declaration in the docs, even if they don't have a semicolon on them in the source (i.e. with a function declaration). Could the semicolon be removed in the docs? It'd be nice if that were optional. Secondly, could there be a separate way to output members of structs / classes than members of modules, or is that all handled by a generic system? It looks a little out of place if I want to, say, put a border around the authors and examples sections, but the members of the struct are just sitting there, and if I put a box around members, it'll put a box around the entire module as well. And lastly, how do I change the code highlighting colors?
Oct 13 2005
"Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2 yahoo.com> wrote in message news:dim6gs$2ei4$1 digitaldaemon.com...One thing that annoys me, though - DDoc seems to suffix a semicolon to the end of every declaration in the docs, even if they don't have a semicolononthem in the source (i.e. with a function declaration). Could thesemicolonbe removed in the docs? It'd be nice if that were optional.There isn't an obvious way to control that. The declaration text is actually generated not from the source, but from the symbol table.Secondly, could there be a separate way to output members of structs / classes than members of modules, or is that all handled by a genericsystem?It looks a little out of place if I want to, say, put a border around the authors and examples sections, but the members of the struct are just sitting there, and if I put a box around members, it'll put a box aroundtheentire module as well.Try redefining the DDOC_XXXX macros.And lastly, how do I change the code highlighting colors?Redefine the D_XXXX macros, which are by default set to: D_COMMENT = $(GREEN $0) D_STRING = $(RED $0) D_KEYWORD = $(BLUE $0) D_PSYMBOL = $(U $0) D_PARAM = $(I $0)
Oct 13 2005
"Walter Bright" <newshound digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:dimcq2$2laq$1 digitaldaemon.com...There isn't an obvious way to control that. The declaration text is actually generated not from the source, but from the symbol table.So the semicolons are part of the symbols? That seems odd..Try redefining the DDOC_XXXX macros.If you mean the DDOC_MEMBERS section, I have. However, the same macro applies to members of modules _and_ members of classes/structs. I'd like to know how to (if at all possible) use one macro for the module-level members, and another for class/struct members.Redefine the D_XXXX macros, which are by default set to: D_COMMENT = $(GREEN $0) D_STRING = $(RED $0) D_KEYWORD = $(BLUE $0) D_PSYMBOL = $(U $0) D_PARAM = $(I $0)Might want to document those; the Doc Doc (hehe) doesn't mention them at all. Thanks for those!
Oct 13 2005
"Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2 yahoo.com> wrote in message news:dimi9f$2ue1$1 digitaldaemon.com...Might want to document those; the Doc Doc (hehe) doesn't mention them at all. Thanks for those!I just realized something - there is no number highlighting. Will this be a future feature?
Oct 13 2005
"Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2 yahoo.com> wrote in message news:dimu68$r0n$1 digitaldaemon.com...I just realized something - there is no number highlighting. Will this beafuture feature?It could be done easilly enough, I just wonder if there's much value to it.
Oct 14 2005
"Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2 yahoo.com> wrote in message news:dimi9f$2ue1$1 digitaldaemon.com..."Walter Bright" <newshound digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:dimcq2$2laq$1 digitaldaemon.com...Not what I meant. I meant the text is generated from the symbol table information (you can see that in the dmd front end source). There is no obvious place in it to control the appearance of a semicolon.There isn't an obvious way to control that. The declaration text is actually generated not from the source, but from the symbol table.So the semicolons are part of the symbols? That seems odd..toTry redefining the DDOC_XXXX macros.If you mean the DDOC_MEMBERS section, I have. However, the same macro applies to members of modules _and_ members of classes/structs. I'd likeknow how to (if at all possible) use one macro for the module-levelmembers,and another for class/struct members.Ok, you're right. It uses the same scheme for all "members of an enclosing symbol", and that includes modules, structs, classes, enums, templates, etc. But does there need to be a distinction?It does (perhaps you're looking at an older version): Highlighting of D code is performed by the following macros: D Code Formatting Macros D_COMMENT Highlighting of comments D_STRING Highlighting of string literals D_KEYWORD Highlighting of D keywords D_PSYMBOL Highlighting of current declaration name D_PARAM Highlighting of current function declaration parametersRedefine the D_XXXX macros, which are by default set to: D_COMMENT = $(GREEN $0) D_STRING = $(RED $0) D_KEYWORD = $(BLUE $0) D_PSYMBOL = $(U $0) D_PARAM = $(I $0)Might want to document those; the Doc Doc (hehe) doesn't mention them at all.
Oct 14 2005
"Walter Bright" <newshound digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:dinu23$2j6g$2 digitaldaemon.com...Not what I meant. I meant the text is generated from the symbol table information (you can see that in the dmd front end source). There is no obvious place in it to control the appearance of a semicolon.Still not understanding what you mean, and the frontend is more than a mess. But I'll take your word.Ok, you're right. It uses the same scheme for all "members of an enclosing symbol", and that includes modules, structs, classes, enums, templates, etc. But does there need to be a distinction?Because usually I don't want module-level members styled the same way as class or struct-level members.It does (perhaps you're looking at an older version):Ooh, then there's a problem with the 0.135 archive - it has the 0.134 docs. Just checked the ZIP, looked at the DDoc doc and the changelog, and it's 0.134.
Oct 14 2005