Discussion:
Looking for comments/corrections on Lisp Doc-Generation Tool Review
Sabra Crolleton
2012-09-25 04:54:10 UTC
Permalink
Hello all,

I put together a draft of a review of common lisp documentation generation
tools at
https://sites.google.com/site/sabraonthehill/lisp-document-generation-apps.

As almost everyone on the list has more experience than I have with lisp
(and some of you are authors of these programs), I would appreciate any
corrections or comments on the draft. I've only had time to test with sbcl
(1.0.58) but do intend to try to test with other lisps as well.

Thank you.

Sabra
Pascal J. Bourguignon
2012-09-25 06:06:38 UTC
Permalink
Content preview: Sabra Crolleton <sabra.crolleton-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w-***@public.gmane.org>
writes: > Hello all, > > I put together a draft of a review of common lisp
documentation > generation tools at > https://sites.google.com/site/sabraonthehill/lisp-document-generation-apps.
Post by Sabra Crolleton
As almost everyone on the list has more experience than I have with >
lisp (and some of you are authors of these programs), I would > appreciate
any corrections or comments on the draft. I've only had > time to test with
sbcl (1.0.58) but do intend to try to test with > other lisps as well. [...]


Content analysis details: (-0.8 points, 5.0 required)

pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
0.0 FSL_RCVD_USER FSL_RCVD_USER
-0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
-0.8 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain
Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.cl-pro/702>



Sabra Crolleton
Post by Sabra Crolleton
Hello all,
I put together a draft of a review of common lisp documentation
generation tools at
https://sites.google.com/site/sabraonthehill/lisp-document-generation-apps.
As almost everyone on the list has more experience than I have with
lisp (and some of you are authors of these programs), I would
appreciate any corrections or comments on the draft. I've only had
time to test with sbcl (1.0.58)  but do intend to try to test with
other lisps as well.
You missed lispdoc it seems.

Now, of course, being free software, and being simple enough, lispdoc is
often modified to suit personal needs. I modified it, and I noticed a
couple of other forks too.

http://cliki.net/LispDoc

Here's my fork:
https://gitorious.org/com-informatimago/com-informatimago/trees/master/lispdoc

and the doc I generate with it:
http://www.informatimago.com/develop/lisp/doc/



Think about adding a link to your document on cliki.net.
--
__Pascal Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/
A bad day in () is better than a good day in {}.
Didier Verna
2012-09-25 12:46:30 UTC
Permalink
Content preview: I wrote: > Otherwise, I will look into the backtraces you
provided. The first one is fixed in the latest version. I cannot reproduce
the second one. Maybe the cause were the same for both. Please test. If it
still breaks, I would like a more detailed backtrace. [...]

Content analysis details: (-100.8 points, 5.0 required)

pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
-100 USER_IN_WHITELIST From: address is in the user's white-list
-0.8 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain
Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.cl-pro/703>
Otherwise, I will look into the backtraces you provided.
The first one is fixed in the latest version. I cannot reproduce the
second one. Maybe the cause were the same for both. Please test. If it
still breaks, I would like a more detailed backtrace.
--
Resistance is futile. You will be jazzimilated.

Scientific site: http://www.lrde.epita.fr/~didier
Music (Jazz) site: http://www.didierverna.com
Didier Verna
2012-09-25 10:01:32 UTC
Permalink
Content preview: Sabra Crolleton <sabra.crolleton-***@public.gmane.org> wrote: > I put
together a draft of a review of common lisp documentation > generation tools
at https://sites.google.com/site/sabraonthehill/ > lisp-document-generation-apps.
[...]

Content analysis details: (-100.8 points, 5.0 required)

pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
-100 USER_IN_WHITELIST From: address is in the user's white-list
-0.8 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain
Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.cl-pro/704>
Post by Sabra Crolleton
I put together a draft of a review of common lisp documentation
generation tools at https://sites.google.com/site/sabraonthehill/
lisp-document-generation-apps.
Thank you for this feedback. I'm the author of Declt. Here are some
comments.
Post by Sabra Crolleton
License info: According to the documentation, this should be able to
be passed in the call to declt, but I could not get this to work.
One possible source of confusion is that you need to explicitely pass a
:license keyword to DECLT to get a Copying chapter (:license defaults to
nil). However, Declt will also advertise the contents of the :license
field from the ASDF system definition on the /system/ page, without
processing it. Declt doesn't try to guess the license from the ASDF
:license field because people do whatever they want in this field and it
would be too difficult to be accurate. As a result, if this field says
"GNU GPL" but you pass :LICENSE :BSD to the call to DECLT, then you will
indeed get something inconsistent.
Post by Sabra Crolleton
Properly flags the license as MIT, but makes a textual statement about
this being under GPL3
Provided the above, that is not possible. Or, I don't understand you.

BTW, the upcoming release of Declt will support 2 new license types:
:MIT and :LGPL. Others on demand.
Post by Sabra Crolleton
Internal symbols: Only if specified in the call to the document
generator. It does not attempt to read the asd file for this
information
I don't understand. Internal symbols are always documented. What has
the ASDF file to do with this ?
Post by Sabra Crolleton
Class info: Declt only provides limited information here. It only
provides the name and the document string, unlike other packages which
provide slots, methods, etc
Declt does document generic functions and methods (but they do not
belong to classes). Do you mean that you would like back pointers from
classes to applicable methods ? Given multiple inheritance, that's sort
of frightening. Slots are on my TODO list.
Post by Sabra Crolleton
Slot accessors: no
Slot accessors are generic function so they are documented as such. I
agree it would be convenient to have back pointers to them (when slots
are documented).
Post by Sabra Crolleton
I may be overly repressed, but I found inserting the name of the declt
version "James T. Kirk" seemed a bit tacky.
I presume you're talking about the small Declt notice that's inserted
in the final document. The next version will give you some control on
this notice by way of a :DECLT-NOTICE keyword argument (possible values:
NIL, :SHORT and :LONG).
Post by Sabra Crolleton
Installation Notes No problems other than the slight irritation of
loading a package called com.dvlsoft.declt instead of something simple
like declt.
Short package names are EVIL. If that really upsets you, you can call
(com.dvlsoft.declt:nickname-package) right after loading it, and from
there on, you can use just DECLT as a nickname. You can even automate
that with CL-RCFILES for example.
Post by Sabra Crolleton
Author: Yes if defined in the call to declt
Author Email: Yes, if defined in the call to declt
Software Version: You need to explicitly state this in the command to declt
That is incorrect. All of this is extracted from the system definition
if not provided explicitly. The only thing that is not is the license
(see above).
Post by Sabra Crolleton
Conditions: no
That's incorrect. Conditions are documented and indexed in the Data
Types section.
Post by Sabra Crolleton
Homepage: no
Special Variable Values: No Variable names are shown, but not their
current values
[ and some other features ] I don't think those would be very useful
in a /reference/ manual (as opposed to a user manual). Maybe "what calls
what", yeah.


Otherwise, I will look into the backtraces you provided.

Thanks again.
--
Resistance is futile. You will be jazzimilated.

Scientific site: http://www.lrde.epita.fr/~didier
Music (Jazz) site: http://www.didierverna.com
Sabra Crolleton
2012-09-25 14:30:13 UTC
Permalink
I have made changes to the declt descriptions based on Didier Verna's
feedback. I will try to make corrections (or additions) to packages as
swiftly as possible as I do not like to have incorrect information out in
public.

Even just your thoughts on what document generation programs should and
should not do would be valuable. Please let me know if you want or do not
want attribution.

Thank you.

Sabra

On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 9:54 PM, Sabra Crolleton
Post by Sabra Crolleton
Hello all,
I put together a draft of a review of common lisp documentation generation
tools at
https://sites.google.com/site/sabraonthehill/lisp-document-generation-apps
.
As almost everyone on the list has more experience than I have with lisp
(and some of you are authors of these programs), I would appreciate any
corrections or comments on the draft. I've only had time to test with sbcl
(1.0.58) but do intend to try to test with other lisps as well.
Thank you.
Sabra
Nikodemus Siivola
2012-09-25 17:33:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sabra Crolleton
Hello all,
I put together a draft of a review of common lisp documentation generation
tools at lisp document generation apps | sabraonthehill<https://sites.google.com/site/sabraonthehill/lisp-document-generation-apps>
.
You seem to be missing sb-texinfo - I don't mind itmissing, but if you're
going for a comprehensive review... ;)

Cheers,

-- nikodemus
--
Sent from a tablet, sorry about the top-post and sloppy editing.
Faré
2012-09-25 18:27:57 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Nikodemus Siivola
Post by Sabra Crolleton
Hello all,
I put together a draft of a review of common lisp documentation generation
tools at lisp document generation apps | sabraonthehill.
Maybe you should list my exscribe amongst the tools?
It won't extract documentation from source,
but it's a nice tool to write documentation.

And even if you insist on documentation extraction,
TeX-style literate programming in Common Lisp deserves mention, with
Alex Plotnick's clweb and Roy Turner's LP/Lisp.

—♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org
No man would listen to you talk if he didn't know it was his turn next.
— Edgar Watson Howe
Cyrus Harmon
2012-09-25 23:13:39 UTC
Permalink
Not sure if this fits the criteria, but I used my smarkup package for documentation for clem, opticl-examples, chemical, cl-bio, etc… and of course for writing my PhD thesis.
Post by Faré
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Nikodemus Siivola
Post by Sabra Crolleton
Hello all,
I put together a draft of a review of common lisp documentation generation
tools at lisp document generation apps | sabraonthehill.
Maybe you should list my exscribe amongst the tools?
It won't extract documentation from source,
but it's a nice tool to write documentation.
And even if you insist on documentation extraction,
TeX-style literate programming in Common Lisp deserves mention, with
Alex Plotnick's clweb and Roy Turner's LP/Lisp.
—♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org
No man would listen to you talk if he didn't know it was his turn next.
— Edgar Watson Howe
_______________________________________________
pro mailing list
http://lists.common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pro
Marco Antoniotti
2012-09-26 04:48:19 UTC
Permalink
Ok. I'll pitch in.

I have been working on an automated system called HE&Lambda;P, I am using to internally to produce the documentation of the few libraries I wrote and maintain: CLAZY, CL-UNIFICATION, CL-ENUMERATION, DEF, etc etc.

I will release it "very soon now" :)

Cheers

--
Marco
Post by Cyrus Harmon
Not sure if this fits the criteria, but I used my smarkup package for documentation for clem, opticl-examples, chemical, cl-bio, etc… and of course for writing my PhD thesis.
Post by Faré
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 1:33 PM, Nikodemus Siivola
Post by Sabra Crolleton
Hello all,
I put together a draft of a review of common lisp documentation generation
tools at lisp document generation apps | sabraonthehill.
Maybe you should list my exscribe amongst the tools?
It won't extract documentation from source,
but it's a nice tool to write documentation.
And even if you insist on documentation extraction,
TeX-style literate programming in Common Lisp deserves mention, with
Alex Plotnick's clweb and Roy Turner's LP/Lisp.
—♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org
No man would listen to you talk if he didn't know it was his turn next.
— Edgar Watson Howe
_______________________________________________
pro mailing list
http://lists.common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pro
_______________________________________________
pro mailing list
http://lists.common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pro
--
Marco Antoniotti, Associate Professor tel. +39 - 02 64 48 79 01
DISCo, Università Milano Bicocca U14 2043 http://bimib.disco.unimib.it
Viale Sarca 336
I-20126 Milan (MI) ITALY

Please note that I am not checking my Spam-box anymore.
Please do not forward this email without asking me first.
Vsevolod Dyomkin
2012-09-26 07:50:24 UTC
Permalink
Also, please, take a look at https://github.com/archimag/cl-sphinx

Best,
Vsevolod Dyomkin
+38-096-111-41-56
skype, twitter: vseloved



On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 7:54 AM, Sabra Crolleton
Post by Sabra Crolleton
Hello all,
I put together a draft of a review of common lisp documentation generation
tools at
https://sites.google.com/site/sabraonthehill/lisp-document-generation-apps
.
As almost everyone on the list has more experience than I have with lisp
(and some of you are authors of these programs), I would appreciate any
corrections or comments on the draft. I've only had time to test with sbcl
(1.0.58) but do intend to try to test with other lisps as well.
Thank you.
Sabra
_______________________________________________
pro mailing list
http://lists.common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pro
Continue reading on narkive:
Search results for 'Looking for comments/corrections on Lisp Doc-Generation Tool Review' (Questions and Answers)
5
replies
what are programming languages?
started 2007-11-14 02:15:22 UTC
programming & design
Loading...