[Mono-list] Re: where to get the right documentation?

[Giuseppe Greco]

> I've only just picked up on this thread, so excuse me if some of this has
> already been said.
>
> I agree with Davy. I don't want to learn GTK+ just to learn GTK#.
>
> If you just want skeleton API documentation to get you started why not run
> the
> GTK# assemblies through ndoc. I'm not sure if ndoc will run on mono. The
> worst
> case is compiling the GTK# source and generating the XML doc files
> locally,
> then using ndoc to either produce .chm help file or MSDN style html api
> docs.

Yes, but if I'm not wrong, XML files produced by monodoc cannot be
processed directly with ndoc... monodoc generates an XML file for
each corresponding *.cs file, while ndoc exprects a single XML file
for each assembly.

The mono project does not embed the documentation into the code.
Instead, XML skeleton are generated with monodoc starting from the
compiled assemblies.

Gius_.

>
> I'm a little surprised no-one has done this yet. This could be a useful
> contribution to the GTK# project. If there's no takers, I'll happily do
> it.
>
> Does this sound useful?
>
> Brian.
>
> ---------- Original Message -----------
> [snip]
>> unfortunately i don't have the time to learn GTK+ and then start using
>> gtk#.  Most people won't be willing to learn GTK+ just because they
>> need it to use gtk# in a way that allows them to write advanced GUI
>> applications.  It's kinda like telling people they need to learn C
>> before they can learn C#.  I wanna be able to use gtk# efficiently
>> without having to learn GTK+.  And i'm sure many people feel the same
>> way about this.
>>
>> Once again, i do not want to offend the people that work on mono.  On
>> the contrary, i'm very happy with the things that are already possible
>> with mono.  I just want to point out that for those of us who don't
>> have any gtk+ experience, it's frustrating to learn gtk# due to the
>> current level of the documentation.  And yea i've already received
>> plenty of "it's a developing project so do your part and write the
>> documentation yourself" mails so don't bother pointing that out.  I'd
>> be willing to help out in the documentation part, but it's kinda hard
>> to write documentation about stuff
>> (methods/events/...) you didn't even know existed isn't it?  Now of
>> course i can't expect the documentation to be as good as the one
>> available at MSDN.  But it would be nice to at least have a complete
>> API reference (all the extra eplanation isn't even necessary... just a
>> list of everything the class has to offer would be nice) which would
>> be easily accessible (for instance in HTML form like that GTK+ API
>> documentation that you mentioned).
>>
>> All i'm saying is that if you want people to use mono and gtk#, then
>> don't expect them to learn GTK+ first or to have GTK+ experience.
>> People who don't know GTK+ but who want to learn GTK# won't like being
>> told "learn GTK+ first and then you'll be able to use GTK# well
>> enough".  As i said before, it's like telling people to learn C before
>> they can learn C# and we all know that's not necessary.
>>
>> kind regards,
>> davy brion
> ------- End of Original Message -------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mono-list maillist  -  Mono-list@lists.ximian.com
> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-list
>


----------------------------------------
Giuseppe Greco

::agamura::

phone:  +41 (0)91 604 67 65
mobile: +41 (0)76 390 60 32
email:  giuseppe.greco@agamura.com
web:    www.agamura.com
----------------------------------------