|
|
No I did not, because I was not aware of it.
Thank will try it.
|
|
|
|
|
this processes existing comments.
it does not create the comments themselves.
CI/CD = Continuous Impediment/Continuous Despair
|
|
|
|
|
Of course it does, it needs the comments to convert them to document format. Which is what the OP asked for in his question.
|
|
|
|
|
This is not code documentation, these are just unnecessary comments  
|
|
|
|
|
Extremely necessary if you want your SPICE or ASPICE certification.
GCS/GE d--(d) s-/+ a C+++ U+++ P-- L+@ E-- W+++ N+ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE Y+ PGP t+ 5? X R+++ tv-- b+(+++) DI+++ D++ G e++ h--- r+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
The shortest horror story: On Error Resume Next
|
|
|
|
|
If those comments/methods are in a class library those comments could be very helpful to folks using that library.
There are no solutions, only trade-offs. - Thomas Sowell
A day can really slip by when you're deliberately avoiding what you're supposed to do.
- Calvin (Bill Watterson, Calvin & Hobbes)
|
|
|
|
|
The autogenerated comments will just tell you what you already see from the name and types. Documentation is for the things you can't see directly.
Personally my preferce is not having the autogenerated comment, then you do not need to waste time finding out if it tells you anything or not.
|
|
|
|
|
I took this to be a framework for filling in you more descriptive comments, such as <param name="hand" />Set of cards currently held by 'bidder'
(I can imagine even more helpful explanations that this, especially if I knew more of the context.)
Without any explanation, just formatting the method prototype in a different layout, is meaningless.
Religious freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make five.
|
|
|
|
|
The crusade against comments wields a rusty pin and calls it a sword.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Doesn't triple clicking "/" in VS generate the comment block?
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
|
VS refuses return info as well for me.
And comment "Nons the trump cards." is pointless.
public static string NonTrumpCards(HandCards hand, int TrumpID)
{
return hand.GetHandExTrumpString(TrumpID);
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
Is installed now but I do not see a menu item or context menu item for starting it.
What do I miss?
|
|
|
|
|
Never used it myself, just looked good.
Graeme
"I fear not the man who has practiced ten thousand kicks one time, but I fear the man that has practiced one kick ten thousand times!" - Bruce Lee
|
|
|
|
|
|
And comment "Nons the trump cards." is pointless.
Not necessarily. Change the XML comment style to font color red, bold, and voila, you can scroll through your code with all information needed visible in the same place, same style.
Side note: My Delphi 7 maintenance mode has three colors, bold red for comments, bold green for strings and bold/normal gray for the rest, on black background. It is perfect to find where to modify the code.
|
|
|
|
|
From reading the question and replies to which the OP has also replied, I understand that the OP wants a tool to generate the xmldoc example given.
And the only question I have is what value this "documentation" has? It tells you nothing you couldn't already glean from the signature. It's "documentation" like this which drives the "no comments" movement - because this is just more reading material for the consumer - it does absolutely nothing to explain the why or the methodology of the decorated function. It will rot because it's been noise ever since it was introduced, so at some point, it won't tell you something obvious - it will just be a source of "WAT?!" for the reader.
I'm incredibly dismayed at people looking for tools to do this and write their unit tests for them. Are we even craftspeople any more? Do you consider yourself a creator, or a button-pusher?
------------------------------------------------
If you say that getting the money
is the most important thing
You will spend your life
completely wasting your time
You will be doing things
you don't like doing
In order to go on living
That is, to go on doing things
you don't like doing
Which is stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
Davyd McColl wrote: And the only question I have is what value this "documentation" has?
Maybe a formal requirement?den2k88 wrote: Extremely necessary if you want your SPICE or ASPICE certification.
I have been working under coding standard regimes requiring the arguments to be repeated ("prepeated"?) above the function declaration in a formal syntax, regardless of certifications.
Mostly it has been so that if anyone asks for documentation of the source code, the company can proudly present a huge PDF document, split into main sections for each namespace, main chapters for the classes and sometimes each method has been given a separate page for describing its invocation interface and arguments.
All is automatically generated from the formatted comments. It is useful for nothing except that it allows you to state, without lying: "Of course we maintain full documentation of the source code".
Religious freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make five.
|
|
|
|
|
and people wonder why, when there is documentation, a lot of the time, it completely sucks ):
fwiw, typing /// in Rider (and, I'd assume, in VS, using ReSharper) automatically inserts an xmldoc skeleton, like so:
public int Add(int a, int b)
{
return a + b;
}
so one could do the following, which I do in my personal library projects because I'd like there to be intellisense documentation, and some day I'll find a tool that generates a nice html site out of that xmldoc (there are some, but I haven't found one that is free and any good - I may have to resort to writing my own):
- enable xmldocumentation in the project
- update the csproj, as early as possible, with:
<PropertyGroup>
<GenerateDocumentationFile>true</GenerateDocumentationFile>
<TreatWarningsAsErrors>true</TreatWarningsAsErrors>
</PropertyGroup>
3. When creating a new method, or in response to build failure, do a triple-slash over the method and try to think of anything useful that could go in the summary. Sometimes it will be obvious, eg "Adds a and b and returns the result" - but I find that having to think about it, a lot of the time, there are useful summaries against my methods. I want full xmldoc for my users, but I agree there are times when the method seems quite obvious - so this is what I do there.
At least following the above instead of just running a tool invokes the random chance that your documentation is actually useful. Certifications that require documentation without any stipulation of usefulness seem like a complete waste of time:
- for the OP, certifiers and the users.
- OP has to run a tool or write some code.
- Certifiers have to check the output. Users have to use external code essentially blind - esp in an example like OPs where the actual intent is not at all obvious from the method name, at least not to a person who isn't "on the inside" with OP's terminology, and I'm 100% sure that a more useful doc string could be thought of there.
Running a tool to produce this useless documentation runs counter to the original intent of the certification too. If I were a certifier and saw that was what was going on, I'd fail the project /2c
------------------------------------------------
If you say that getting the money
is the most important thing
You will spend your life
completely wasting your time
You will be doing things
you don't like doing
In order to go on living
That is, to go on doing things
you don't like doing
Which is stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
Atomineer is not free, but it's not expensive, either. It has a very high degree of customizability along with being very good at determining code function from element names. Documentation can be applied at various scopes, from a single element to an entire file, and limited to public members or applied to all. I have been using it for years and have been very pleased with it.
|
|
|
|
|
In your VS project, type
/ three times and that comment will be generated, like so:
private int ParseLevel(string text) {
|
|
|
|
|
Sure, this was already posted on Tuesday.
The Lounge[^]
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
