Services & Resources / Wolfram Forums
-----
 /
MathGroup Archive
2007
*January
*February
*March
*April
*May
*June
*July
*August
*September
*October
*Archive Index
*Ask about this page
*Print this page
*Give us feedback
*Sign up for the Wolfram Insider

MathGroup Archive 2007

[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]

Search the Archive

Re: Automated documentation (like javadoc) for packages?

  • To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
  • Subject: [mg81240] Re: Automated documentation (like javadoc) for packages?
  • From: Szabolcs Horvát <szhorvat at gmail.com>
  • Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2007 03:35:04 -0400 (EDT)
  • References: <fcio8g$4o$1@smc.vnet.net>

Kentaroh Takagaki wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> I have a Mathematica package for graphing specialized data, and I plan to
> share this code with others. I am wondering if there is any way to
> automatically generate documentation for the package (similar to javadoc for
> Java), which will parse the .m files for symbol::usage statements,
> Options[symbol] statements, scope, etc.

This would probably not be as useful for Mathematica as for C++, Java, 
etc. because Mathematica already provides easy ways to read usage messages:

When I come across package with scarce external documentation, I load 
the package

<< PackageName`

and then ask for all the symbol names in the package with

? PackageName`*

This gives a list of clickable names.

> Even a rudimentary script would be of great help, and just .nb or html
> output is fine. (It doesn't have to use the Help Browser or new
> Documentation Center). Please let me know if anybody has or knows of a way.

You could start by getting the names of all public symbols with 
Names["PackageName`*"].  Note that this evaluates to a list of Strings 
that need to be converted to symbols using Symbol before e.g. 
#::"usage"& or Options can be applied.  After that you'll just need some 
formatting functions to create a pretty notebook document from this list.

-- 
Szabolcs


  • Prev by Date: Re: LegendreP error (bug?) in Mathematica
  • Next by Date: Re: Automated documentation (like javadoc) for packages?
  • Previous by thread: Automated documentation (like javadoc) for packages?
  • Next by thread: Re: Automated documentation (like javadoc) for packages?