documentation

Closed . This question is opinion-based . It is not currently accepting answers. Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post . Closed last year . This type/member supports the .NET Framework infrastructure and is not intended to be used directly from your code. Can anyone speak to the fact that the System.Web.Razor.* namespaces are polluted with this? This seems plain irresponsible, if not insulting. I would like to understand the rationale behind this decision, and my question to any .NET contributors is, why? Addendum

I'm trying to document the getName() method of The following Person constructor : Javascript code : /** * Creates a person instance. * @param {string} name The person's full name. * @constructor */ function Person( name ) { /** * Returns the person's full name. * @return {string} The current person's full name. */ function getName() { return name; } this.getName = getName; this.getN = getName; this.getFullName = getName; } As you can see, the getName() method has two aliases ( getN() and getFullName() ), so the obvious tag to use is the @alias tag, but unfortunately, it has two major problems

Very basic question here. I have to write out a data glossary for a COBOL program. This data glossary includes the following details about every variable: Name Data type Range of values (if applicable) Line numbers Fuller name I have several variables that include level 88 switches. My question is this: Are these level 88 switches counted as variables, and should I include them in the data glossary? Or, judging by the data glossary structure I have to work with, should they be ignored in this context? And while I'm here, another simple question. Should fillers be included in data glossaries?

How to self-document a type-alias that is used in another certain library? In the below example, class User defines an alias User::type that is supposed to be referred only in class Library via T::type . Here is the diagram :- Library.h Library<T> expected only T that defines a certain alias (e.g. T::type in this example). #include <iostream> class Base{}; //dummy for the sake of example template<class T>class Library{ Base* t=nullptr; public: typename T::type getValue(){return static_cast<typename T::type>(t);} //some complex function, e.g. T::aType::doSomething() }; In real cases, Library<T>

I want to generate javadocs through maven's site generation plugin and I want to have automatic UML diagrams created and embedded in the javadoc. The statsvn project uses yDoc to generate their UML documentation but I think they're using Maven1. yDoc is a commercial shareware product, so I'm unsure how the open source statsvn project integrates with it (or if there is a free version to use for javadoc generation). Example svnstat yDoc javadoc: ChurnPageMaker.java svnstat includes ydoc as a plugin to their Maven1 report generation: project.xml <reports> <report>maven-ydoc-plugin</report> ... <

I have a project with several large apps and where settings and apps files are split. directory structure goes something like that: project_name __init__.py apps __init__.py app1 app2 3rdparty __init__.py lib1 lib2 settings __init__.py installed_apps.py path.py templates.py locale.py ... urls.py every app is like that __init__.py admin __init__.py file1.py file2.py models __init__.py model1.py model2.py tests __init__.py test1.py test2.py views __init__.py view1.py view2.py urls.py how to use a sphinx to autogenerate documentation for that? I want something like that for each in settings

In the socket.io documentation, they use a nomenclature that doesn't look like javascript (though it's a javascript library) that seems a bit out of place. Examples here: http://socket.io/docs/client-api/ (the page has changed since, here's a web archive snapshot as of 2014 ) This one is clear enough (just specifying types of arguments and return value): IO(url:String, opts:Object):Socket But this style I don't recognize at all: IO#protocol Manager#timeout(v:Boolean):Manager I can pretty much figure it out through deduction (though I find it hard to read because it looks so foreign), but where