Difference between revisions of "Haddock/Development ideas"

From HaskellWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Removing ideas that are now implemented or irrelevant.)
(doctest does the QC stuff)
 
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 2: Line 2:
   
 
* It would be good to have a recursive flag that would operate on all the .hs and .lhs files under a single directory.
 
* It would be good to have a recursive flag that would operate on all the .hs and .lhs files under a single directory.
* Haddock should emit the documentation about instances. For example, it's important to document that the Data.Map instance of Foldable only folds over the values and not the keys.
 
 
* There should be an annotation to include a function's entire definition in the documentation. This would be useful for functions like <hask>(.)</hask> and <hask>mapM</hask> where the definition is the clearest possible documentation.
* There should be an annotation to include a function's entire definition in the documentation. This would be useful for functions like <hask>(.)</hask> and <hask>mapM</hask> where the definition is the clearest possible documentation, and for QuickCheck properties that specify the behavior of a library.
 
 
* There should be an option to include a simplified implementation of a function that is equivalent to the one in the code. For instance, instead of showing a complex implementation of List.length that makes use of stream fusion we could show a simple one based on foldl'.
 
* There should be an option to include a simplified implementation of a function that is equivalent to the one in the code. For instance, instead of showing a complex implementation of List.length that makes use of stream fusion we could show a simple one based on foldl'.
 
* Optionally [http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-cafe/2008-January/038211.html show qualifications of identifiers], that is print <hask>Sequence.map</hask> rather than <hask>map</hask>, <hask>Music.T</hask> rather than just <hask>T</hask>. The option for haddock could be <code>--qualification QUAL</code>
 
* Optionally [http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/haskell-cafe/2008-January/038211.html show qualifications of identifiers], that is print <hask>Sequence.map</hask> rather than <hask>map</hask>, <hask>Music.T</hask> rather than just <hask>T</hask>. The option for haddock could be <code>--qualification QUAL</code>

Latest revision as of 19:11, 14 March 2014

Most of these ideas are very old, but some may still be relevant.

  • It would be good to have a recursive flag that would operate on all the .hs and .lhs files under a single directory.
  • There should be an annotation to include a function's entire definition in the documentation. This would be useful for functions like (.) and mapM where the definition is the clearest possible documentation.
  • There should be an option to include a simplified implementation of a function that is equivalent to the one in the code. For instance, instead of showing a complex implementation of List.length that makes use of stream fusion we could show a simple one based on foldl'.
  • Optionally show qualifications of identifiers, that is print Sequence.map rather than map, Music.T rather than just T. The option for haddock could be --qualification QUAL
    • none (default) strip off qualification (just map)
    • orig show the identifiers as they are written in the module (e.g. map or List.map)
    • full show all identifiers with full qualification (Data.List.map)