Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Support multi-line/here comments #29

Closed
balupton opened this issue Feb 3, 2011 · 14 comments
Closed

Support multi-line/here comments #29

balupton opened this issue Feb 3, 2011 · 14 comments

Comments

@balupton
Copy link

balupton commented Feb 3, 2011

Was surprised that this was the case. Is this just not done yet, or is there a specific reason why multiline comments aren't supported?

@bergie
Copy link

bergie commented Mar 10, 2011

Supporting multiline comments would indeed make Docco work better with code initially written with JavaDoc/PhpDoc in mind. In that case however we probably want to either ignore or do something smart about lines starting with @somekey

@balupton
Copy link
Author

It also doesn't support coffeescript multi line comments:

thisIsCode()

###

this is a comment

### this is still the same comment

and still the same

###

thisIsCode()

@balupton
Copy link
Author

In response to @bergie's suggestion for supporting @somekey, I disagree. Comments which start with /** are phpdoc/javadoc etc, rather than actual documentation, docco should only support /* comments.

@adamnbowen
Copy link

@balupton: I don't see your logic there. Sure, @somekey properties might look a little strange rendered in docco, but you are supposed to put full descriptions of what the method/class/file is doing in the first few lines of doc blocks: [http://manual.phpdoc.org/HTMLSmartyConverter/HandS/phpDocumentor/tutorial_phpDocumentor.howto.pkg.html#basics.docblock](DocBlocks -- phpDocumentor Basics)

This seems to be the very definition of "actual documentation" as you are describing it, so I'm not seeing the logic of how it shouldn't be supported in docco.

@balupton
Copy link
Author

True. I can see it going both ways.

@SamWhited
Copy link
Contributor

There has been a potential fix for this issue started in Pull Request #72.

@akidee
Copy link

akidee commented Feb 8, 2012

Multiline comments should be supported, prefixing every line with "#" seems to make no sense.

@ProLoser
Copy link

Completely breaks standard convention. I mean it's called multi-line comments for a reason. Who seriously comments their code this way?

@bergie
Copy link

bergie commented Apr 11, 2012

Actually, the current state is even worse than that. I've tried using Docco together with CoffeeDoc, with the idea that Docco handles the literal programming part of documenting the internals of my software, and CoffeeDoc provides the API documentation for people who just want to use the library.

The problem is that Docco does something rather weird with multiline CoffeeScript commands. The following code (with CoffeeDoc comment):

###
# NodeXT extension handling

Gives me:

<h1>#</h1>
<p>NodeXT extension handling</p>

The problem here being that this part is inside a multi-line comment and should be completely ignored by Docco.

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Aug 1, 2012

Javascript multiline comments (/* multiple lines */) still don't seem to be supported by docco.
Should they be working right now? If so then, maybe I'm just missing some dependencies.

@adamnbowen
Copy link

@grepic No, the behavior has not been altered—multiline comments are not supported. You can see this is the case in the code itself: https://github.com/jashkenas/docco/blob/master/resources/languages.json

@vjsingh
Copy link

vjsingh commented Aug 20, 2012

Agreed, this makes it pretty useless for JS documentation in my opinion

@morficus
Copy link

Does anyone know if support for block (or jsdoc-style) comments (specifically in javascript) is anywhere in the "roadmap" ?
This is one feature I would love to see

@justindujardin
Copy link
Collaborator

Closing this issue. For more information please see the comments in pull request #72

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

9 participants