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
effort.
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?
Thanks,
Sean
More information about the erlang-questions
mailing list