comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive: archive

Home » Public Forums » archive » IDLDOC question

Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend

Re: IDLDOC Question [message #74570 is a reply to message #66975]

Tue, 25 January 2011 10:33

David Fanning
Messages: 11724
Registered: August 2001

Senior Member

Paul van Delst writes:

> David, what about doing something like
>
> -----%<-----
> @mywidgetapp_helper.pro
>
> ; main routine documentation
> ;
> ;
> ; .....
> ;
> ;
> PRO mywidgetapp, args...., keywords.....
> ...just the main widget app code...
> END
> -----%<-----
>
>
> where the "mywidgetapp_helper.pro" file contains all the associated code for the main app.

This is a pretty good idea, but I guess the main reason
I don't care for it is that it creates too many "parts."

I would say something approaching 70% of the e-mail I
get on problems with Coyote Library routines involves
having library routines that are out of date. Or, rather,
failure to update the Library and test the routine one
more time before they contact me. I could easily pull
out the two objects that make up the FSC_Window application,
for example, and just document the small FSC_Window program.
But how many people would just update the FSC_Window
program and not the guts of the application!? This is
a nightmare scenario in my eyes.

And, personally, I like having all the helper routines
in the same file. I find it easier to work with them
then when they are separate. Different strokes, I
guess.

I think my main problem is that I am betwixt and between
the old IDL documentation template for older routines
and the new IDLDOC method for newer routines. I'm going
to need to bite the bullet someday when its very slow
and all I feel like doing is drinking a beer. :-)

Cheers,

David

--
David Fanning, Ph.D.
Fanning Software Consulting, Inc.
Coyote's Guide to IDL Programming: http://www.idlcoyote.com/
Sepore ma de ni thui. ("Perhaps thou speakest truth.")

Report message to a moderator

[Message index]

		IDLDOC question By: David Gell on Mon, 29 June 2009 07:12
		Re: IDLDoc Question By: David Fanning on Thu, 11 November 2010 14:13
		Re: IDLDoc Question By: Michael Galloy on Fri, 12 November 2010 09:28
		Re: IDLDoc Question By: Michael Galloy on Thu, 11 November 2010 13:54
		Re: IDLDOC Question By: David Fanning on Tue, 25 January 2011 10:33
		Re: IDLDOC Question By: Paul Van Delst[1] on Tue, 25 January 2011 09:27
		Re: IDLDOC Question By: Michael Galloy on Mon, 24 January 2011 15:39
		Re: IDLDOC Question By: Jeremy Bailin on Thu, 20 October 2011 11:48
		Re: IDLDOC Question By: Michael Galloy on Thu, 20 October 2011 12:42
		Re: IDLDOC question By: Michael Galloy on Wed, 07 December 2011 19:03
		Re: IDLDOC question By: David Fanning on Wed, 07 December 2011 14:32
		Re: IDLDOC question By: manodeep@gmail.com on Wed, 07 December 2011 13:56
		Re: IDLDOC question By: David Fanning on Wed, 07 December 2011 14:07
		Re: IDLDOC question By: Brian Wolven on Wed, 07 December 2011 13:32
		Re: IDLDOC question By: David Fanning on Wed, 07 December 2011 13:13

Previous Topic:	Re: Removing Array Values
Next Topic:	Interpolation

-=] Back to Top [=-

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [

] [

]

Current Time: Sat Oct 11 03:26:28 PDT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.00327 seconds