- HaskellDoc - Haskell.org

Re: ANNOUNCE: Haddock version 0.2, a Haskell documentation tool
by Ashley Yakeley 10 May '02

10 May '02

It would be nice if it would report instance declarations... -- Ashley Yakeley, Seattle WA

1 0

Re: ANNOUNCE: Haddock version 0.2, a Haskell documentation tool
by Ashley Yakeley 10 May '02

10 May '02

At 2002-05-09 09:44, Simon Marlow wrote: >I'm pleased to announce version 0.2 of Haddock, a documentation >generation tool for Haskell source code. It's available from > > http://www.haskell.org/haddock/ It's at <http://www.haskell.org/haddock/haddock-0.2-src.tar.gz>. -- Ashley Yakeley, Seattle WA

1 0

RE: Haddock Parse Bugs
by Simon Marlow 06 May '02

06 May '02

> I tried using Haddock on JVM-Bridge. It fails on empty datatypes: > > module HDTest where > { > data Foo; > } Fixed, thanks. > It also fails on 'with' (for implicit parameters). 'with' is > deprecated > in 5.03, but its replacement syntax using 'let' won't work > with 5.02.2. There isn't any support for implicit parameters in the parser yet, I've added it to the TODO list for now. Cheers, Simon

1 0

Re: Using Haddock for standard libraries (was: RE: ANNOUNCE: Haddock version 0.1, a Haskell documentation tool)
by Ashley Yakeley 06 May '02

06 May '02

At 2002-05-06 03:27, Simon Marlow wrote: >This doesn't mean it will be a "standard" as such, merely that the >reference implementation of the libraries will be marked-up using >Haddock annotations. If people aren't comfortable with requiring a >specific tool for generating the documentation from the reference >sources, then we could perhaps standardise the annotation syntax >instead. That's probably good enough for me. I'd like to start documenting my code, but I'd like to be sure that I won't have to rewrite all the comments just because the doc tool falls out of favour. -- Ashley Yakeley, Seattle WA

1 0

Using Haddock for standard libraries (was: RE: ANNOUNCE: Haddock version 0.1, a Haskell documentation tool)
by Simon Marlow 06 May '02

06 May '02

[ redirected to libraries(a)haskell.org ] > At 2002-05-01 04:48, Simon Marlow wrote: > > >I'm pleased to announce version 0.1 of Haddock, a documentation > >generation tool for Haskell source code. > > I take it this is the "standard" Haskell documentation tool now, that > implementations of the standard libraries will use? I've been > waiting for something like this. I'd like Haddock to become a widely-used Haskell documentation tool, but I don't want to presume to call it "the standard tool". I'd like us to use Haddock to document the hierarchical libraries in fptools/libraries (indeed, that was the main reason I wrote it). Haddock is by no means perfect, but I think it's a step in the right direction. What do other people think? Should we adopt Haddock as the tool for documenting the libraries? This doesn't mean it will be a "standard" as such, merely that the reference implementation of the libraries will be marked-up using Haddock annotations. If people aren't comfortable with requiring a specific tool for generating the documentation from the reference sources, then we could perhaps standardise the annotation syntax instead. Nevertheless, we do *need* to document fptools/libraries in order that we (the GHC team) can release the next version of GHC. So excessive faffing around is not an option :-) Assuming that we adopt Haddock, I'd be grateful for any volunteers to help document everything in fptools/libraries - including the Prelude and Haskell 98 standard libraries (one of the shortcomings of our current library documentation is that one has to go elsewhere to find the documentation for these standard bits). Prelude & std library documentation can for the most part be culled from the Reports and various other resources on the web, and much of the other library documentation can be ported from the old hslibs documentation, suitably unDocBooked. I'll volunteer to coordinate the documentation effort. Cheers, Simon

1 0

Haddock Parse Bugs
by Ashley Yakeley 05 May '02

05 May '02

I tried using Haddock on JVM-Bridge. It fails on empty datatypes: module HDTest where { data Foo; } It also fails on 'with' (for implicit parameters). 'with' is deprecated in 5.03, but its replacement syntax using 'let' won't work with 5.02.2. -- Ashley Yakeley, Seattle WA

1 0

Re: ANNOUNCE: Haddock version 0.1, a Haskell documentation tool
by Ashley Yakeley 04 May '02

04 May '02

At 2002-05-01 04:48, Simon Marlow wrote: >I'm pleased to announce version 0.1 of Haddock, a documentation >generation tool for Haskell source code. I take it this is the "standard" Haskell documentation tool now, that implementations of the standard libraries will use? I've been waiting for something like this. -- Ashley Yakeley, Seattle WA

1 0

ANNOUNCE: Haddock version 0.1, a Haskell documentation tool
by Simon Marlow 01 May '02

01 May '02

I'm pleased to announce version 0.1 of Haddock, a documentation generation tool for Haskell source code. It's available from http://www.haskell.org/haddock/ Here's the README: Haddock, a Haskell Documentation Tool ===================================== This is Haddock, a tool for automatically generating documentation from annotated Haskell source code. It is primary intended for documenting libraries, but it should be useful for any kind of Haskell code. Like other systems ([1],[2]), Haddock lets you write documentation annotations next to the definitions of functions and types in the source code, in a syntax that is easy on the eye when writing the source code (no heavyweight mark-up). The documentation generated by Haddock is fully hyperlinked - click on a type name in a type signature to go straight to the definition, and documentation, for that type. Haddock understands Haskell's module system, so you can structure your code however you like without worrying that internal structure will be exposed in the generated documentation. For example, it is common to implement a library in several modules, but define the external API by having a single module which re-exports parts of these implementation modules. Using Haddock, you can still write documentation annotations next to the actual definitions of the functions and types in the library, but the documentation annotations from the implementation will be propagated to the external API when the documentation is generated. Abstract types and classes are handled correctly. In fact, even without any documentation annotations, Haddock can generate useful documentation from your source code. Haddock can generate documentation in multiple formats; currently HTML is implemented, and there is partial support for generating DocBook. The generated HTML uses stylesheets, so you need a fairly up-to-date browser to view it properly (Mozilla, Konqueror, Opera, and IE 6 should all be ok). Full documentation can be found in the doc/ subdirectory, in DocBook format. Please send questions and suggestions to me: Simon Marlow <simonmar(a)microsoft.com> [1] IDoc - A No Frills Haskell Interface Documentation System http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~chak/haskell/idoc/ [2] HDoc http://www.fmi.uni-passau.de/~groessli/hdoc/

1 0

One Hour of Long Distance under a Buck!
by campaigns＠lgreturner.ru 04 Dec '01

04 Dec '01

1 0

Camldoc
by Simon Peyton-Jones 11 Oct '01

11 Oct '01

I'm not sure how active the HaskellDoc mailing list is just now, but there's a terrific flurry of mail about CamlDoc on the Caml mailing list. It must be worth looking carefully at their design. Simon http://caml.inria.fr/archives/200110/threads.html

2 1