Edoc thoughts

Sean Hinde sean.hinde@REDACTED
Fri Oct 3 13:57:30 CEST 2003

Fellow Documentation Generators,

We have a new found requirement to generate a goodly thud of internal 
documentation for each of our new systems. Hence I have developed a 
great enthusiasm for tools which can deliver said volume for minimum 

First efforts using edoc are quite promising, but have generated a 
couple of small troubles  within:

1. I would like to do something like:

@spec read_customer(Msisdn::string(), Operator::atom()) ->
	{ok, Number::string(), Services::services()} | not_likely

But edoc doesn't seem to like the notation Number::string() in a 
result. I am forced to have one or the other - Number or string(). Is 
there some strong reason for this and is it easy to change?

2. It would be nice to have a global @type area, as well as local 
@types which appear together with the @spec for the function.

3. This last could probably be an exercise for the reader (or writer?) 
but an edoc:directory(string()) or even 
edoc:application(Otp_app::atom()) mechanism to do all files and 
generate an overview page would be the icing on the cake for this 
excellent time saver.

Richard C or anyone else?


More information about the erlang-questions mailing list