U++ forum: Welcome to the forum

Search on this site

Search in forums

Home » Developing U++ » Documentation » T++ working

Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend

T++ working [message #18915]

Fri, 31 October 2008 15:24

mirek
Messages: 14255
Registered: November 2005

Ultimate Member

OK, I have started to actually use T++ and everything looks quite positive.

Maybe it is time we restart our efforts with documenting U++ now... Smile

Mirek

Report message to a moderator

Re: T++ working [message #18918 is a reply to message #18915]

Fri, 31 October 2008 16:57

mr_ped
Messages: 826
Registered: November 2005
Location: Czech Republic - Praha

Experienced Contributor

also some refreshed stable release would be nice in such case Wink

Report message to a moderator

Re: T++ working [message #18919 is a reply to message #18918]

Fri, 31 October 2008 17:56

chickenk
Messages: 171
Registered: May 2007
Location: Grenoble, France

Experienced Member

mr_ped wrote on Fri, 31 October 2008 16:57

also some refreshed stable release would be nice in such case Wink

+1! +1! +1!

please please a release

Report message to a moderator

Re: T++ working [message #18920 is a reply to message #18919]

Fri, 31 October 2008 18:49

mirek
Messages: 14255
Registered: November 2005

Ultimate Member

Ehm, many things are still in disorder as result of massive A++/T++ refactoring...

Well, I will think about it. Maybe a list of things that have to be fixed before the stable release would help....

Mirek

Report message to a moderator

Re: T++ working [message #18922 is a reply to message #18920]

Fri, 31 October 2008 20:27

cbpporter
Messages: 1427
Registered: September 2007

Ultimate Contributor

Well maybe it's time to resume my documentation process, since A++ seems ready.

But I have some questions. I was doing one final round on Size and I have some questions.

First of all what happened to code references? They no longer have a leading "::" and the small little boxes only pick up documentation if it's reference does not have the leading "::". Am I supposed to remove the resolution operator from doc references?

Second: does the Alt-10 function still work? If yes, maybe a button for it should be added.

Third: is the style that is used when inserting new items final? If yes, there are still some small bugs, like the name of the type being underlined sometimes, but other times not.

Also a small suggestion: the hyperlink input should have a small "x" button on the right, which clears the hyperlink.

Another suggestion: make the help browser back-buffered. It is extremely flickery.

And a small bug: clicking on the font size toggle button in the help browser does not refresh the content. I have to click on another topic and click back to get an updated font size.

Report message to a moderator

Re: T++ working [message #18926 is a reply to message #18922]

Fri, 31 October 2008 23:53

captainc
Messages: 278
Registered: December 2006
Location: New Jersey, USA

Experienced Member

Also, I'm not sure if this is intended or not, but I cannot view the help browser in split view. I think this would be really handy to reference or document while you look at your code.

Report message to a moderator

Re: T++ working [message #18928 is a reply to message #18922]

Sat, 01 November 2008 09:03

mirek
Messages: 14255
Registered: November 2005

Ultimate Member

cbpporter wrote on Fri, 31 October 2008 15:27

First of all what happened to code references? They no longer have a leading "::" and the small little boxes only pick up documentation if it's reference does not have the leading "::". Am I supposed to remove the resolution operator from doc references?

Yes, I have removed them. They were both redundant and confusing (because, in fact, we are in Upp namespace now).

Quote:

Second: does the Alt-10 function still work? If yes, maybe a button for it should be added.

It does, but it is considered as temporary hidden helper to convert old docs.

Quote:

Third: is the style that is used when inserting new items final? If yes, there are still some small bugs, like the name of the type being underlined sometimes, but other times not.

It should be underlined if the type is user defined -> has its own coderef. In that case, hyperlink is created. (Help browser is able to handle coderef hyperlinks).

I have also noticed that at least one time it did not work right - some issue can be there.

Quote:

Also a small suggestion: the hyperlink input should have a small "x" button on the right, which clears the hyperlink.

Another suggestion: make the help browser back-buffered. It is extremely flickery.

And a small bug: clicking on the font size toggle button in the help browser does not refresh the content. I have to click on another topic and click back to get an updated font size.

[/quote]

OK

Mirek

Report message to a moderator

Re: T++ working [message #18929 is a reply to message #18926]

Sat, 01 November 2008 09:04

mirek
Messages: 14255
Registered: November 2005

Ultimate Member

captainc wrote on Fri, 31 October 2008 18:53

Also, I'm not sure if this is intended or not, but I cannot view the help browser in split view. I think this would be really handy to reference or document while you look at your code.

Well, I have to admit I am hitting some implementation difficulities there, for now. It will need some hard work to enable that...

Anyway, Alt+Tab still works.

Mirek

Report message to a moderator

Re: T++ working [message #18985 is a reply to message #18929]

Mon, 03 November 2008 08:19

tojocky
Messages: 607
Registered: April 2008
Location: UK

Contributor

Is a problems with svn 589 on win32 xp when i edit topic (.tpp). The file "all.i" from folder <name>.tpp do not created after edit topic. For example look package "PieTest" from bazaar.

[Updated on: Mon, 03 November 2008 08:21]

Report message to a moderator

Re: T++ working [message #18989 is a reply to message #18985]

Mon, 03 November 2008 10:38

mirek
Messages: 14255
Registered: November 2005

Ultimate Member

tojocky wrote on Mon, 03 November 2008 02:19

Is a problems with svn 589 on win32 xp when i edit topic (.tpp). The file "all.i" from folder <name>.tpp do not created after edit topic. For example look package "PieTest" from bazaar.

You have to explicitely activate this feature - right click on .tpp group and select "Includeable".

(The reason is that such .tpp eats significantly more memory now and it is only needed for .tpp containing app doc resources).

Mirek

Report message to a moderator

Re: T++ working [message #18991 is a reply to message #18989]

Mon, 03 November 2008 13:37

tojocky
Messages: 607
Registered: April 2008
Location: UK

Contributor

Thank you Mirek for "Includeable" on .tpp. Will be greate to add in topic!

Report message to a moderator

Re: T++ working [message #18992 is a reply to message #18991]

Mon, 03 November 2008 14:14

chickenk
Messages: 171
Registered: May 2007
Location: Grenoble, France

Experienced Member

Hi,

just a small remark on the new system:

When at least one entry already exists and you want to add another entry documentation, you are not asked if this is a reference or implementation topic. The already existing entry type is used, and corresponding file opened. In the same manner, you can't add an implementation topic to an entry having a reference topic, and vice-versa.

I know the system is not finished, just wanted to make sure you know about that.

Lionel

Report message to a moderator

Re: T++ working [message #18995 is a reply to message #18992]

Mon, 03 November 2008 15:45

mirek
Messages: 14255
Registered: November 2005

Ultimate Member

chickenk wrote on Mon, 03 November 2008 08:14

Yes, I am well aware about the problem. The trouble is that I wanted to make it "quick" in the most common case, therefore the heurestic to adopt previous item topic, as long as scope and access mode is the same.

Any ideas for improved heurestics on whether it should go to topic directly or not?

(Of course, another possibility is simply to remove it Wink

Mirek

Report message to a moderator

Re: T++ working [message #18996 is a reply to message #18995]

Mon, 03 November 2008 15:50

chickenk
Messages: 171
Registered: May 2007
Location: Grenoble, France

Experienced Member

well I am ok with going to topic directly. I like clicking once instead of several times (this systems aims at saving time, doesn't it ?) but other solutions should not be blocked, and available too.

I think implementing a popup menu with all options ("edit ref/imp topic","new ref/imp topic") when right-clicking the icon would be nice.

Lionel

Report message to a moderator

Re: T++ working [message #19000 is a reply to message #18996]

Mon, 03 November 2008 20:44

mirek
Messages: 14255
Registered: November 2005

Ultimate Member

chickenk wrote on Mon, 03 November 2008 09:50

Makes sense.

Still, I would like to improve heurestics too...

Mirek

Report message to a moderator

Re: T++ working [message #19032 is a reply to message #19000]

Thu, 06 November 2008 19:07

cbpporter
Messages: 1427
Registered: September 2007

Ultimate Contributor

OK, I updated Size_ docs on SVN.

Here area couple of observations:

1. Finally A++ has shaped up and is comfortable to work with both for creating new docs and updating old. It still isn't "just sit down and write", but nothing to complain about really.

2. I updated the definitions to fit "the style" and things look quite good.

One issue: when inserting public fields like "T cx", the "T" isn't colored green as in all the other cases.

3. The way new A++ works with the small icons you have to watch a little what you write. You can't just put a definition, a description, some filler bla bla and a header like "public methods", because everything is going to be included in the pop-up. Easily fixed though by setting some default paragraphs to "class" style.

4. Friend methods do not have the small icons, so I left that part of the doc un-updated.

5. On the line "T cx, cy", when hovering the mouse over the little icon only the last item, i.e. "cy" is shown. Easiest fix is to not put more than one variable in the same declaration.

So please take a look at it and give your opinion. I say it's as good as it gets and A++ definitely has a future and the style can be considered final.

Report message to a moderator

Re: T++ working [message #19033 is a reply to message #19032]

Thu, 06 November 2008 19:29

mirek
Messages: 14255
Registered: November 2005

Ultimate Member

cbpporter wrote on Thu, 06 November 2008 13:07

4. Friend methods do not have the small icons, so I left that part of the doc un-updated.

Well - not friend methods, but global functions.

To say the truth, I am pretty udecided what to do with inline friends.

Logically, the belong to "file-scope", but they are usually strongly related to the class template.

Mirek

Report message to a moderator

Re: T++ working [message #19049 is a reply to message #19033]

Fri, 07 November 2008 15:54

cbpporter
Messages: 1427
Registered: September 2007

Ultimate Contributor

I updated the style for point doc also, which somehow got trashed a while ago. I'll update AppEnv and MathUtil also, and them I'll write a couple of pages for Chameleon.

I'm using the new reference type without the leading "::". I hope that this will be final.

Regarding the friend functions, I see the problem. More thought is needed. They do seam to belong to both scopes logically.

Report message to a moderator

Re: T++ working [message #19053 is a reply to message #19049]

Fri, 07 November 2008 21:17

cbpporter
Messages: 1427
Registered: September 2007

Ultimate Contributor

I finished MathUtil, except for about six function which I don't know what they do exactly, so I've left them empty rather than write an approximate description.

I also reformatted Segtor with style and references. The old content was plain text.

I also extracted the constructors and destructor of Vector to it's own section, like in other docs. It is distracting to read a function doc, then a couple of constructors, then a destructor, then again some functions, then another constructor. Having them in the same place is better IMO.

I can also do a check-up round on all the other docs from Core if you don't mind. I saw that most have their references fixed.

Report message to a moderator