Sign in Join

Live chat for Free Pascal, Lazarus, Delphi and every Pascal programmer.

Mailing lists / fpc-devel / 2008-08

[Fwd: Re: FPDoc links to RTL, FCL]

13 messages · 3 people · –

Reply by email Subscribe to this list Your subscription

Read-only archive. Use j and k to move between messages.

Chris Kirkpatrick

At the suggestion of Mattias, I am also sending this to fpc-devel. I don't think it's a bug; the entries are all documented in the RTL .xml files, but when the docs are built for the sourceforge HTML files the RTL files are obviously built with the --hide-protected option.

Links in entries of the LCL that refer to RTL protected properties are not recognised.

I believe the solution is to remove the --hide-protected option from the script that generates the documentation files.

Regards - Chris

Earlier message 32 lines
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [Lazarusdev] FPDoc links to RTL, FCL Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2008 12:11:24 +0200 From: Mattias Gärtner Reply-To: Lazarus Developers List To: Lazarus Developers List References: Zitat von Chris Kirkpatrick : > I have been documenting help files with links to inherited properties > and methods; these now work pretty well, but if I include a link to a > description of a protected property/method in the RTL or FCL it is not > recognised (even though the property is described in the sources). > > Examples: links to TComponent.Loaded and TPersistent.AssignTo > > I believe that this is because the HTML documents for RTL/FCL are > created using the hide-protected option, while the LCL documents do not > use this option. > > Is there any way the protected properties could be revealed in the > RTL/FCL docs? Or would they become too huge and cumbersome? Otherwise we > simply have to accept that some links won't be recognised. IMO protected members must be documented too. Ask on the fpc list or create a bug report. Mattias

Reply by email

Vincent Snijders
to Michael Van Canneyt: This is normal. As soon as I have documented them, yes. But that is not very high on my…
Michael Van Canneyt wrote 21 lines
On Sun, 31 Aug 2008, Chris Kirkpatrick wrote: > At the suggestion of Mattias, I am also sending this to fpc-devel. I don't > think it's a bug; the entries are all documented in the RTL .xml files, but > when the docs are built for the sourceforge HTML files the RTL files are > obviously built with the --hide-protected option. > > Links in entries of the LCL that refer to RTL protected properties are not > recognised. This is normal. > I believe the solution is to remove the --hide-protected option from the > script that generates the documentation files. As soon as I have documented them, yes. But that is not very high on my priority list. If you want the protected methods anywhere soon, I suggest you create a lazarus copy of the HTML docs with the options that you want.

Does make rtl.chk support that by passing something like NOHIDEPROTECTED=1 to the make command?

Vincent

Reply by email

Michael Van Canneyt
to Chris Kirkpatrick: At the suggestion of Mattias, I am also sending this to fpc-devel. I don't think it's a…
Chris Kirkpatrick wrote 7 lines
At the suggestion of Mattias, I am also sending this to fpc-devel. I don't think it's a bug; the entries are all documented in the RTL .xml files, but when the docs are built for the sourceforge HTML files the RTL files are obviously built with the --hide-protected option. Links in entries of the LCL that refer to RTL protected properties are not recognised.

This is normal.

I believe the solution is to remove the --hide-protected option from the script that generates the documentation files.

As soon as I have documented them, yes. But that is not very high on my priority list.

If you want the protected methods anywhere soon, I suggest you create a lazarus copy of the HTML docs with the options that you want.

Michael.

Reply by email

Michael Van Canneyt
to Vincent Snijders: Does make rtl.chk support that by passing something like NOHIDEPROTECTED=1 to the make…
Vincent Snijders wrote 26 lines
Michael Van Canneyt schreef: > > On Sun, 31 Aug 2008, Chris Kirkpatrick wrote: > > > At the suggestion of Mattias, I am also sending this to fpc-devel. I don't > > think it's a bug; the entries are all documented in the RTL .xml files, > > but > > when the docs are built for the sourceforge HTML files the RTL files are > > obviously built with the --hide-protected option. > > > > Links in entries of the LCL that refer to RTL protected properties are not > > recognised. > > This is normal. > > > I believe the solution is to remove the --hide-protected option from the > > script that generates the documentation files. > > As soon as I have documented them, yes. But that is not very high on my > priority list. > > If you want the protected methods anywhere soon, I suggest you create a > lazarus copy of the HTML docs with the options that you want. Does make rtl.chk support that by passing something like NOHIDEPROTECTED=1 to the make command?

Currently not, but we can add something like it. Patches most welcome.

Michael.

Reply by email

Vincent Snijders
to Michael Van Canneyt
Michael Van Canneyt wrote 7 lines
>> If you want the protected methods anywhere soon, I suggest you create a >> lazarus copy of the HTML docs with the options that you want. > Does make rtl.chk support that by passing something like NOHIDEPROTECTED=1 to > the make command? Currently not, but we can add something like it. Patches most welcome.

See attached patch.

Unfortunately fpdoc from trunk crashes when creating the fcl docs. Can you try to reproduce it?

Vincent

Reply by email

Vincent Snijders
to Vincent Snijders
Vincent Snijders wrote 14 lines
Michael Van Canneyt schreef: >>> If you want the protected methods anywhere soon, I suggest you create a >>> lazarus copy of the HTML docs with the options that you want. >> Does make rtl.chk support that by passing something like >> NOHIDEPROTECTED=1 to >> the make command? > > Currently not, but we can add something like it. Patches most welcome. > See attached patch. Unfortunately fpdoc from trunk crashes when creating the fcl docs. Can you try to reproduce it?

I used the following command line (without wrapping): make fcl.chk FPCSRCDIR=/home/vsds/src/fpc/2.3
FPDOC=/home/vsds/fpc/bin/fpdoc
FPDOCOPTS=--footer=/home/vsds/src/lazsource/docs/html/sourceforgefooter.xml HIDEPROTECTED=NO

The last lines of output, including backtrace:
No documentation node found for identifier :
#fcl.CustApp.TCustomApplication.DoRun
No documenAn unhandled exception occurred at $0809121F : EAccessViolation : Access violation
$0809121F TDOMELEMENT__GETATTRIBUTE, line 2075 of src/dom.pp $080AC7A5 SCANMODULE, line 563 of dw_html.pp
$080AC330 THTMLWRITER__CREATE, line 627 of dw_html.pp tation node found for identifier :
#fcl.CustApp.TCustomApplication.GetParams
No documentation node found for identifier :
#fcl.CustApp.TCustomApplication.GetParamCount
$08049583 CREATEDOCUMENTATION, line 260 of fpdoc.pp $080499A3 main, line 290 of fpdoc.pp

I hope this helps,
Vincent

Reply by email

Vincent Snijders
to Michael Van Canneyt: Works fine here (without the extra options). Michael.
Michael Van Canneyt wrote 22 lines
On Tue, 2 Sep 2008, Vincent Snijders wrote: > Vincent Snijders schreef: >> Michael Van Canneyt schreef: >>>>> If you want the protected methods anywhere soon, I suggest you create >>>>> a >>>>> lazarus copy of the HTML docs with the options that you want. >>>> Does make rtl.chk support that by passing something like >>>> NOHIDEPROTECTED=1 to >>>> the make command? >>> Currently not, but we can add something like it. Patches most welcome. >>> >> See attached patch. >> >> Unfortunately fpdoc from trunk crashes when creating the fcl docs. Can you >> try to reproduce it? > I used the following command line (without wrapping): > make fcl.chk FPCSRCDIR=/home/vsds/src/fpc/2.3 FPDOC=/home/vsds/fpc/bin/fpdoc > FPDOCOPTS=--footer=/home/vsds/src/lazsource/docs/html/sourceforgefooter.xml > HIDEPROTECTED=NO >

You removed the --hide-protected too? It works with hideprotected. Did you test with HIDEPROTECTED=NO.

Vincent

Reply by email

Michael Van Canneyt
to Vincent Snijders: I used the following command line (without wrapping): make fcl.chk…
Vincent Snijders wrote 35 lines
Vincent Snijders schreef: > Michael Van Canneyt schreef: > > > > If you want the protected methods anywhere soon, I suggest you create > > > > a > > > > lazarus copy of the HTML docs with the options that you want. > > > Does make rtl.chk support that by passing something like > > > NOHIDEPROTECTED=1 to > > > the make command? > > > > Currently not, but we can add something like it. Patches most welcome. > > > > See attached patch. > > Unfortunately fpdoc from trunk crashes when creating the fcl docs. Can you > try to reproduce it? I used the following command line (without wrapping): make fcl.chk FPCSRCDIR=/home/vsds/src/fpc/2.3 FPDOC=/home/vsds/fpc/bin/fpdoc FPDOCOPTS=--footer=/home/vsds/src/lazsource/docs/html/sourceforgefooter.xml HIDEPROTECTED=NO The last lines of output, including backtrace: No documentation node found for identifier : #fcl.CustApp.TCustomApplication.DoRun No documenAn unhandled exception occurred at $0809121F : EAccessViolation : Access violation $0809121F TDOMELEMENT__GETATTRIBUTE, line 2075 of src/dom.pp $080AC7A5 SCANMODULE, line 563 of dw_html.pp $080AC330 THTMLWRITER__CREATE, line 627 of dw_html.pp tation node found for identifier : #fcl.CustApp.TCustomApplication.GetParams No documentation node found for identifier : #fcl.CustApp.TCustomApplication.GetParamCount $08049583 CREATEDOCUMENTATION, line 260 of fpdoc.pp $080499A3 main, line 290 of fpdoc.pp

Works fine here (without the extra options).

Michael.

Reply by email

Michael Van Canneyt
to Vincent Snijders: You removed the --hide-protected too? It works with hideprotected. Did you test with…
Vincent Snijders wrote 30 lines
Michael Van Canneyt schreef: > > On Tue, 2 Sep 2008, Vincent Snijders wrote: > > > Vincent Snijders schreef: > > > Michael Van Canneyt schreef: > > > > > > If you want the protected methods anywhere soon, I suggest you > > > > > > create > > > > > > a > > > > > > lazarus copy of the HTML docs with the options that you want. > > > > > Does make rtl.chk support that by passing something like > > > > > NOHIDEPROTECTED=1 to > > > > > the make command? > > > > Currently not, but we can add something like it. Patches most welcome. > > > > > > > See attached patch. > > > > > > Unfortunately fpdoc from trunk crashes when creating the fcl docs. Can > > > you > > > try to reproduce it? > > I used the following command line (without wrapping): > > make fcl.chk FPCSRCDIR=/home/vsds/src/fpc/2.3 > > FPDOC=/home/vsds/fpc/bin/fpdoc > > FPDOCOPTS=--footer=/home/vsds/src/lazsource/docs/html/sourceforgefooter.xml > > HIDEPROTECTED=NO > > You removed the --hide-protected too? It works with hideprotected. Did you test with HIDEPROTECTED=NO.

Works fine.

Michael.

Reply by email

Vincent Snijders
to Michael Van Canneyt
Michael Van Canneyt wrote 33 lines
On Wed, 3 Sep 2008, Vincent Snijders wrote: > Michael Van Canneyt schreef: >> On Tue, 2 Sep 2008, Vincent Snijders wrote: >> >>> Vincent Snijders schreef: >>>> Michael Van Canneyt schreef: >>>>>>> If you want the protected methods anywhere soon, I suggest you >>>>>>> create >>>>>>> a >>>>>>> lazarus copy of the HTML docs with the options that you want. >>>>>> Does make rtl.chk support that by passing something like >>>>>> NOHIDEPROTECTED=1 to >>>>>> the make command? >>>>> Currently not, but we can add something like it. Patches most welcome. >>>>> >>>> See attached patch. >>>> >>>> Unfortunately fpdoc from trunk crashes when creating the fcl docs. Can >>>> you >>>> try to reproduce it? >>> I used the following command line (without wrapping): >>> make fcl.chk FPCSRCDIR=/home/vsds/src/fpc/2.3 >>> FPDOC=/home/vsds/fpc/bin/fpdoc >>> FPDOCOPTS=--footer=/home/vsds/src/lazsource/docs/html/sourceforgefooter.xml >>> HIDEPROTECTED=NO >>> > > You removed the --hide-protected too? It works with hideprotected. Did you > test with HIDEPROTECTED=NO. Works fine.

After applying the patch? Otherwise HIDEPROTECTED=NO doesn't do anything.

Vincent

Reply by email

Vincent Snijders
to Vincent Snijders: See attached patch. Unfortunately fpdoc from trunk crashes when creating the fcl docs. Can
Vincent Snijders wrote 14 lines
Michael Van Canneyt schreef: >>> If you want the protected methods anywhere soon, I suggest you create a >>> lazarus copy of the HTML docs with the options that you want. >> Does make rtl.chk support that by passing something like >> NOHIDEPROTECTED=1 to >> the make command? > > Currently not, but we can add something like it. Patches most welcome. > See attached patch. Unfortunately fpdoc from trunk crashes when creating the fcl docs. Can you try to reproduce it?

The crash has vbeen fixed. Can you apply the path?

Vincent

Reply by email

Michael Van Canneyt
to Vincent Snijders
Vincent Snijders wrote 18 lines
Vincent Snijders schreef: > Michael Van Canneyt schreef: > > > > If you want the protected methods anywhere soon, I suggest you create > > > > a > > > > lazarus copy of the HTML docs with the options that you want. > > > Does make rtl.chk support that by passing something like > > > NOHIDEPROTECTED=1 to > > > the make command? > > > > Currently not, but we can add something like it. Patches most welcome. > > > > See attached patch. > > Unfortunately fpdoc from trunk crashes when creating the fcl docs. Can you > try to reproduce it? The crash has vbeen fixed. Can you apply the path?

Sure !

If you can: please resend the patch, because that section of the mailing list has just been archived and is no longer in my mailboxes. It's a hassle to extract that :( Sending it would save me a lot of work.

Michael.

Reply by email

Michael Van Canneyt
to Vincent Snijders: The crash has vbeen fixed. Can you apply the path? Vincent
Vincent Snijders wrote 18 lines
Vincent Snijders schreef: > Michael Van Canneyt schreef: > > > > If you want the protected methods anywhere soon, I suggest you create > > > > a > > > > lazarus copy of the HTML docs with the options that you want. > > > Does make rtl.chk support that by passing something like > > > NOHIDEPROTECTED=1 to > > > the make command? > > > > Currently not, but we can add something like it. Patches most welcome. > > > > See attached patch. > > Unfortunately fpdoc from trunk crashes when creating the fcl docs. Can you > try to reproduce it? The crash has vbeen fixed. Can you apply the path?

Got the patch, applied. Thanks.

Michael.

Reply by email