From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,41cdd08c4c779b88 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-05-13 15:26:06 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news-spur1.maxwell.syr.edu!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newspeer.monmouth.com!newscon02.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!newsmst01.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!postmaster.news.prodigy.com!newssvr14.news.prodigy.com.POSTED!3bae8248!not-for-mail From: tmoran@acm.org Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Q: Generating Documenation from Ada Sources? References: <3CE02030.7040500@snafu.de> X-Newsreader: Tom's custom newsreader Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: 64.175.242.32 X-Complaints-To: abuse@prodigy.net X-Trace: newssvr14.news.prodigy.com 1021328718 ST000 64.175.242.32 (Mon, 13 May 2002 18:25:18 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 13 May 2002 18:25:18 EDT Organization: Prodigy Internet http://www.prodigy.com X-UserInfo1: [[PAPDONAJUMB_LY@BCBNWX@RJ_XPDLMN@GZ_GYO^ZUDUWYAKVUOPCW[ML\JXUCKVFDYZKBMSFX^OMSAFNTINTDDMVW[X\THOPXZRVOCJTUTPC\_JSBVX\KAOTBAJBVMZTYAKMNLDI_MFDSSOLXINH__FS^\WQGHGI^C@E[A_CF\AQLDQ\BTMPLDFNVUQ_VM Date: Mon, 13 May 2002 22:25:18 GMT Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:23983 Date: 2002-05-13T22:25:18+00:00 List-Id: > > conventions in coding style, so AdaBrowse+ can know which comments are > > "relevant". >... > currently playing around with certain heutistics based on a > minimal common sense snytax, e.g. We went a different way, since most of the source files already existed, including customer's copies, and we didn't want to change them. We have a database of information, for instance every entity has a Remarks section (which of course may be empty) and a Spec section. Subprograms additionally have an Exceptions Raised section, and so forth. These are filled in as much as possible by a program that scans source files for specs, links, comments saying "Raises ..." directly following a subprogram etc. But this is viewed as just a convenience. We expect most of the text to be entered, or at least modified by, a human writer. Syntactic information like the file something is declared in, the package to "with" for it, any predefined constants of a type, etc comes from scanning the source code and is not modified by the documentation writer.