Difference between revisions of "Haddock/Development ideas"
< Haddock
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
DuncanCoutts (talk | contribs) (create page with a number of possible haddock features) |
(doctest does the QC stuff) |
||
| (16 intermediate revisions by 11 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | Most of these ideas are '''very''' old, but some may still be relevant. |
||
| − | There would be a number of benefits if [[GHC]]'s parser were extended to understand the [[Haddock]] documentation markup and then Haddock changed to use the [[GHC:as_a_library|GHC API]]: |
||
| + | * It would be good to have a recursive flag that would operate on all the .hs and .lhs files under a single directory. |
||
| − | * Haddock would get full supprot for GHC's various syntactic extensions. |
||
| + | * There should be an annotation to include a function's entire definition in the documentation. This would be useful for functions like <hask>(.)</hask> and <hask>mapM</hask> where the definition is the clearest possible documentation. |
||
| − | * Haddock would understand <code>{#- LINE -#}</code> pragmas which would allow it to generate links to the original source code. |
||
| + | * There should be an option to include a simplified implementation of a function that is equivalent to the one in the code. For instance, instead of showing a complex implementation of List.length that makes use of stream fusion we could show a simple one based on foldl'. |
||
| − | * Haddock would get much better error messages. |
||
| + | * Optionally [http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-cafe/2008-January/038211.html show qualifications of identifiers], that is print <hask>Sequence.map</hask> rather than <hask>map</hask>, <hask>Music.T</hask> rather than just <hask>T</hask>. The option for haddock could be <code>--qualification QUAL</code> |
||
| − | * Haddock could infer types for functions with no explicit type signature. |
||
| + | ** <code>none</code> (default) strip off qualification (just <hask>map</hask>) |
||
| − | * GHCi and IDEs like [[hIDE]] and [[Visual Haskell]] would be able to display API documentation in more convenient ways like in this [http://haste.dyndns.org:8080/ Haste] screenshot: |
||
| + | ** <code>orig</code> show the identifiers as they are written in the module (e.g. <hask>map</hask> or <hask>List.map</hask>) |
||
| − | [[Image:Haste_screenshot_hovering.png]] |
||
| + | ** <code>full</code> show all identifiers with full qualification (<hask>Data.List.map</hask>) |
||
Latest revision as of 19:11, 14 March 2014
Most of these ideas are very old, but some may still be relevant.
- It would be good to have a recursive flag that would operate on all the .hs and .lhs files under a single directory.
- There should be an annotation to include a function's entire definition in the documentation. This would be useful for functions like
(.)andmapMwhere the definition is the clearest possible documentation. - There should be an option to include a simplified implementation of a function that is equivalent to the one in the code. For instance, instead of showing a complex implementation of List.length that makes use of stream fusion we could show a simple one based on foldl'.
- Optionally show qualifications of identifiers, that is print
Sequence.maprather thanmap,Music.Trather than justT. The option for haddock could be--qualification QUALnone(default) strip off qualification (justmap)origshow the identifiers as they are written in the module (e.g.maporList.map)fullshow all identifiers with full qualification (Data.List.map)