Is there a way of improving the documentation and hosting it on Swift
instead of Apple ?
Currently the Array page lists all of the things the class directly
implements but doesn't include any of the methods mixed in by protocol
extensions (i.e all of the methods from CollectionType).
With YardDoc for Ruby it does this, so you know exactly what methods a
class has.
This confused me to no end as some topics here suggest adding ways of
dropping the first X elements and even I have implemented `shift` which I
didn't know already exist albeit under another name.
Would be great if we could improve these documents for the language in an
open source way :)
We're interested in hosting documentation on Swift.org for a variety of reasons. One motivating reason is to showcase the documentation for the version of the Standard Library that is in active development on 'master'. For example, whenever we generate a new snapshot that can be downloaded we update posted documentation.
We're exploring various options. If you have specific suggestions on what you would like to see, please speak up.
Thanks,
Ted
ยทยทยท
On Jan 6, 2016, at 11:06 AM, James Campbell via swift-dev <swift-dev@swift.org> wrote:
Is there a way of improving the documentation and hosting it on Swift instead of Apple ?
Currently the Array page lists all of the things the class directly implements but doesn't include any of the methods mixed in by protocol extensions (i.e all of the methods from CollectionType).
With YardDoc for Ruby it does this, so you know exactly what methods a class has.
This confused me to no end as some topics here suggest adding ways of dropping the first X elements and even I have implemented `shift` which I didn't know already exist albeit under another name.
Would be great if we could improve these documents for the language in an open source way :)
On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 5:22 PM, Ted kremenek via swift-dev < swift-dev@swift.org> wrote:
Hi James,
We're interested in hosting documentation on Swift.org <http://swift.org>
for a variety of reasons. One motivating reason is to showcase the
documentation for the version of the Standard Library that is in active
development on 'master'. For example, whenever we generate a new snapshot
that can be downloaded we update posted documentation.
We're exploring various options. If you have specific suggestions on what
you would like to see, please speak up.
Thanks,
Ted
On Jan 6, 2016, at 11:06 AM, James Campbell via swift-dev < > swift-dev@swift.org> wrote:
Is there a way of improving the documentation and hosting it on Swift
instead of Apple ?
Currently the Array page lists all of the things the class directly
implements but doesn't include any of the methods mixed in by protocol
extensions (i.e all of the methods from CollectionType).
With YardDoc for Ruby it does this, so you know exactly what methods a
class has.
This confused me to no end as some topics here suggest adding ways of
dropping the first X elements and even I have implemented `shift` which I
didn't know already exist albeit under another name.
Would be great if we could improve these documents for the language in an
open source way :)
On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 5:22 PM, Ted kremenek via swift-dev < > swift-dev@swift.org> wrote:
Hi James,
We're interested in hosting documentation on Swift.org <http://swift.org>
for a variety of reasons. One motivating reason is to showcase the
documentation for the version of the Standard Library that is in active
development on 'master'. For example, whenever we generate a new snapshot
that can be downloaded we update posted documentation.
We're exploring various options. If you have specific suggestions on
what you would like to see, please speak up.
Thanks,
Ted
On Jan 6, 2016, at 11:06 AM, James Campbell via swift-dev < >> swift-dev@swift.org> wrote:
Is there a way of improving the documentation and hosting it on Swift
instead of Apple ?
Currently the Array page lists all of the things the class directly
implements but doesn't include any of the methods mixed in by protocol
extensions (i.e all of the methods from CollectionType).
With YardDoc for Ruby it does this, so you know exactly what methods a
class has.
This confused me to no end as some topics here suggest adding ways of
dropping the first X elements and even I have implemented `shift` which I
didn't know already exist albeit under another name.
Would be great if we could improve these documents for the language in an
open source way :)
These things are achievable, in my opinion. At a minimum, it's worth pinging Nate to have him join in on the discussion rather than trying to replace a really great site that already does a large part of what people are looking for.
-- Erica
ยทยทยท
On Jan 6, 2016, at 6:19 PM, Trent Nadeau via swift-dev <swift-dev@swift.org> wrote:
SwiftDoc is nice, but it doesn't quite do everything I want. The pages for protocols don't list implementing types in the stdlib, and the pages for types don't separate the methods by the protocol(s) that require them. Both are very useful when using generics so that the developer can create the best bounds (i.e., the ones that are least restrictive but still have the required operations and semantics).
On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 5:44 PM, James Campbell <james@supmenow.com <mailto:james@supmenow.com>> wrote:
swiftdoc.org <http://swiftdoc.org/>
SwiftDoc is nice, but it doesn't quite do everything I want. The pages for
protocols don't list implementing types in the stdlib, and the pages for
types don't separate the methods by the protocol(s) that require them. Both
are very useful when using generics so that the developer can create the
best bounds (i.e., the ones that are least restrictive but still have the
required operations and semantics).
ยทยทยท
On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 5:44 PM, James Campbell <james@supmenow.com> wrote:
I completely agree. SwiftDoc is great, and I really appreciate Nate's work
in creating it. It's already very useful and is (IMHO) the prettiest
programming language docs site I've seen.
ยทยทยท
On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 9:52 PM, Erica Sadun <erica@ericasadun.com> wrote:
These things are achievable, in my opinion. At a minimum, it's worth
pinging Nate to have him join in on the discussion rather than trying to
replace a really great site that already does a large part of what people
are looking for.
-- Erica
On Jan 6, 2016, at 6:19 PM, Trent Nadeau via swift-dev < > swift-dev@swift.org> wrote:
SwiftDoc is nice, but it doesn't quite do everything I want. The pages for
protocols don't list implementing types in the stdlib, and the pages for
types don't separate the methods by the protocol(s) that require them. Both
are very useful when using generics so that the developer can create the
best bounds (i.e., the ones that are least restrictive but still have the
required operations and semantics).
On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 5:44 PM, James Campbell <james@supmenow.com> wrote:
Trent, swiftdoc.org <http://swiftdoc.org/> doesn't list the implementing types, but you can see them graphically if you click on the "View Protocol Hierarchy" button on any type or protocol page. Separating the methods by the requiring protocols is a bit trickier, but probably achievable. In any case, it's great to hear constructive feedback from people who've seen the site -- please feel free to open an issue with comments/requests/suggestions: GitHub - SwiftDocOrg/swiftdoc.org: Auto-generated documentation for Swift. Command-click no more.
Nate
ยทยทยท
On Jan 6, 2016, at 8:52 PM, Erica Sadun <erica@ericasadun.com> wrote:
These things are achievable, in my opinion. At a minimum, it's worth pinging Nate to have him join in on the discussion rather than trying to replace a really great site that already does a large part of what people are looking for.
-- Erica
On Jan 6, 2016, at 6:19 PM, Trent Nadeau via swift-dev <swift-dev@swift.org <mailto:swift-dev@swift.org>> wrote:
SwiftDoc is nice, but it doesn't quite do everything I want. The pages for protocols don't list implementing types in the stdlib, and the pages for types don't separate the methods by the protocol(s) that require them. Both are very useful when using generics so that the developer can create the best bounds (i.e., the ones that are least restrictive but still have the required operations and semantics).
On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 5:44 PM, James Campbell <james@supmenow.com <mailto:james@supmenow.com>> wrote:
swiftdoc.org <http://swiftdoc.org/>
Wasn't looking to replace but assist by maybe linking to it and even maybe bringing his repos under the official repo And Nate could still be a contributor
ยทยทยท
Sent from my iPhone
On 7 Jan 2016, at 05:33, Trent Nadeau <tanadeau@gmail.com> wrote:
I completely agree. SwiftDoc is great, and I really appreciate Nate's work in creating it. It's already very useful and is (IMHO) the prettiest programming language docs site I've seen.
On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 9:52 PM, Erica Sadun <erica@ericasadun.com> wrote:
These things are achievable, in my opinion. At a minimum, it's worth pinging Nate to have him join in on the discussion rather than trying to replace a really great site that already does a large part of what people are looking for.
-- Erica
On Jan 6, 2016, at 6:19 PM, Trent Nadeau via swift-dev <swift-dev@swift.org> wrote:
SwiftDoc is nice, but it doesn't quite do everything I want. The pages for protocols don't list implementing types in the stdlib, and the pages for types don't separate the methods by the protocol(s) that require them. Both are very useful when using generics so that the developer can create the best bounds (i.e., the ones that are least restrictive but still have the required operations and semantics).
On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 5:44 PM, James Campbell <james@supmenow.com> wrote: