-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 24
Wishlist: Separate static and instance methods #36
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
Comments
Thank you for the suggestion. This is should be an easy fix to make and we'll look to add it in the next release. I'm intrigued by your suggestion to "provide them in a more human-readable friendly way". We agree that making docs human-friendly is critical. Do you have any examples of what you mean by this so that we can act on it? |
Sure, my idea was that any type has certain properties which end up being defined by the presence of constructors (or the presence of other constructors - like how a move constructor means it doesn't copy unless that is specified too). So instead of just listing the constructors for the reader to do all the compiler math, present a set of properties instead:
This sort of idea. The signatures are noisy and not so interesting, but the properties of the class are what readers would like to know, I believe. |
That is a fantastic suggestion, having hdoc do the "compiler math" as you so aptly described it is a great way for us to reduce the cognitive load on the reader. We'll add this to the roadmap.
Agreed. |
Static methods disappear into the list of instance methods.
https://docs.hdoc.io/danakj/subspace/r3AD4D4163C31005F.html
It would also be really nice to separate constructors and operators out, and maybe even provide them in a more human-readable friendly way instead of just the C++ syntax.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: