[climacs-devel] Commands and documentation

[Robert Strandh]

Hello, 

John Q Splittist writes:
 > 
 > We all know documentation will have to be added eventually, but I'm
 > thinking now, when we're actually writing the commands, would be the
 > time to at least add a few docstrings that might form the basis of the
 > 'self-documenting' part of the emacsness of climacs.

Seems like a good idea. 

 > There is no need to actually do anything with the docstrings at the
 > moment, but do people have any ideas as to a natural and flexible way to
 > set things out? The DEFINE-NAMED-COMMAND macro seems as good a place as
 > any, but while we're fiddling with that, should we also be thinking
 > about a natural way to express a desire to add a command to a particular
 > command table?

Yes, be careful with DEFINE-NAMED-COMMAND.  Together with Dan Barlow,
I have started thinking about associating commands and their key
bindings with say a specific syntax.  Most likely,
DEFINE-NAMED-COMMAND would then have to change so that the specific
command table will be mentioned.  Though I guess putting docstrings in
there would do no harm even if the definition of macro changes. 

-- 
Robert Strandh

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Greenspun's Tenth Rule of Programming: any sufficiently complicated C
or Fortran program contains an ad hoc informally-specified bug-ridden
slow implementation of half of Common Lisp.
---------------------------------------------------------------------