Valgrind, an open-source memory debugger

On Sat, 28 Aug 2004, Julian Seward wrote:

>  Distribution docs in plain text format, ie. README, etc.
>     valgrind/docs/dist_files/

I'm not so keen on this -- it's totally standard for README, INSTALL, 
COPYING, TODO, etc. to be in the top-level directory.  Nobody will look 
for them in valgrind/docs/dist_files/.

As for the FAQ, it's nice to have a copy of that in the top-level 
directory as well, in plain-text, if possible.

> (tech docs)
> - The design and implementation of valgrind (old)
> - How cachegrind works
> - Writing a new Valgrind Tool

I'm not sure if the first two need to be in there any more.  If they are, 
the first should definitely be marked at the top with a big "out of date, 
many details no longer true!" warning.

The rest seems good to me.

> All feedback gratefully received.  It would be handy for folks to
> look at the results, at http://www.dancedetails.org/vgdocs.tar.bz2.

Is that the original XML, or the resulting HTML?  It would be good to have 
both up for viewing.

N

On Sat, 28 Aug 2004, Julian Seward wrote:
>
> - One day we may be able to edit the xml masters directly in
>  OpenOffice (wysiwyg), which would save loads of time and effort.  At
>  the moment, one has to edit the html and constantly reload it in a
>  browser to see that the right thing is happening.

OpenOffice already uses XML format for its document files.  Do an 
'unzip -l' on an OpenOffice .sxw file to see the content.  The XML is 
very compact and ugly, but I notice that there is a configuration 
option to format the XML for humans (resulting in larger files).

Bob
======================================
Bob Friesenhahn
bfriesen@...
http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen

> I'm not so keen on this -- it's totally standard for README, INSTALL,
> COPYING, TODO, etc. to be in the top-level directory.  Nobody will look
> for them in valgrind/docs/dist_files/.
sorry - I didn't explain this very well.
At build-time, FAQ.txt *also* gets generated from the xml, and put into 
dist_files/. After the other formats are generated, the entire contents of 
dist_files gets moved into the top-level dir valgrind/

> As for the FAQ, it's nice to have a copy of that in the top-level
> directory as well, in plain-text, if possible.
see above.

> > (tech docs)
> > - The design and implementation of valgrind (old)
> > - How cachegrind works
> > - Writing a new Valgrind Tool
> I'm not sure if the first two need to be in there any more.  If they are,
> the first should definitely be marked at the top with a big "out of date,
> many details no longer true!" warning.
um, well, praps *all* the docs need a facelift?

> Is that the original XML, or the resulting HTML?  It would be good to have
> both up for viewing.
This is just a tarball of files in .pdf, .ps and .html format so people can 
get can idea of what it all comes out like.

d

On Saturday 28 August 2004 16:08, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> OpenOffice already uses XML format for its document files.  

At this point I think OO can only deal with DOCTYPE article.
Most of the vg-docs are DOCTYPE books, so no-go at present.

d

In message <200408281511.14180.jseward@...>
          Julian Seward <jseward@...> wrote:

> A tarball of the final results is available at
> 
>    http://www.dancedetails.org/vgdocs.tar.bz2
> 
> This contains the generated .pdf, .ps and .html for the user manual
> and FAQ, so you can get a good idea what the result looks like.

Did somebody do s/code/computeroutput/ or something? Only there
are lots of instances of the strange word computeroutput in that
documentation ;-)

Tom

-- 
Tom Hughes (thh@...)
Software Engineer, Cyberscience Corporation
http://www.cyberscience.com/

On Saturday 28 August 2004 17:14, Tom Hughes wrote:
> Did somebody do s/code/computeroutput/ or something? Only there
> are lots of instances of the strange word computeroutput in that
> documentation ;-)

that's the closest I could get to <code>blah</code>
it's not great.
FYI - xml to html markup transformations:

<programlisting>    --> <pre class="programlisting">
<screen>               --> <pre class="screen">
<computeroutput> --> <tt class="computeroutput">
<literal>                  --> <tt>
<emphasis>           --> <i>
<command>           --> <b class="command">
<blockquote>         --> <div class="blockquote">
                                       <blockquote class="blockquote">

I claim to be a total non-expert at all this.  
If anyone has better ideas, tell me please.

d

In message <200408282129.29664.donna@...>
          Donna Robinson <donna@...> wrote:

> On Saturday 28 August 2004 17:14, Tom Hughes wrote:
> > Did somebody do s/code/computeroutput/ or something? Only there
> > are lots of instances of the strange word computeroutput in that
> > documentation ;-)
> 
> that's the closest I could get to <code>blah</code>
> it's not great.

What I meant was that it is only tags that have been changed. Lots of
instances of the word code in the text itself have been changed.

Tom

-- 
Tom Hughes (thh@...)
Software Engineer, Cyberscience Corporation
http://www.cyberscience.com/

On Saturday 28 August 2004 22:00, Tom Hughes wrote:
> What I meant was that it is only tags that have been changed. Lots of
> instances of the word code in the text itself have been changed.
thanks, yes, on further investigation you are right.  mea culpa - that's what 
you get for not paying attention when doing search & replace.  will fix asap. 
(blush)

d