On Sat, 2008-06-14 at 22:20 -0600, Richard Giraud wrote:
I'm looking at the Test.HUnit modules and there are no Haddock annotations. I thought I'd help document the modules but, when I had a look at the source files, I found they were .lhs instead of .hs. There is already some documentation in the files but it's not visible to Haddock.
What's the best way to proceed in a case like this? 1. Shoe-horn in the Haddock annotations by putting them in the code sections (e.g., > -- | Document comment...) but this seems a little cumbersome, especially if these comments show up in the published form of the .lhs file.
2. Rename to the files to .hs and touch up the files so they compile, then add the Haddock annotations.
3. Another option?
You can use: | blah blah
ordinary code
And if you're using Cabal then it uses an extended 'unlit' function which generates sensible input for haddock. In fact this only works at the moment with haddock-0.x (ie 0.8, 0.9) because haddock-2.x does it's own unliting. For an example of this lhs/haddock style, see takusen. Duncan