Menu
▾
▴
ndoc-users — Discussions about using NDoc
You can subscribe to this list here.
| 2004 |
Jan
|
Feb
(2) |
Mar
(17) |
Apr
(9) |
May
(33) |
Jun
(57) |
Jul
(21) |
Aug
(26) |
Sep
(19) |
Oct
(29) |
Nov
(22) |
Dec
(31) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2005 |
Jan
(28) |
Feb
(22) |
Mar
(16) |
Apr
(15) |
May
(12) |
Jun
(19) |
Jul
(11) |
Aug
(18) |
Sep
(6) |
Oct
(32) |
Nov
(16) |
Dec
(6) |
| 2006 |
Jan
(15) |
Feb
(10) |
Mar
(30) |
Apr
(11) |
May
(12) |
Jun
(10) |
Jul
(6) |
Aug
(16) |
Sep
(3) |
Oct
(24) |
Nov
(3) |
Dec
|
| 2007 |
Jan
(3) |
Feb
(2) |
Mar
|
Apr
(7) |
May
(4) |
Jun
(1) |
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
(4) |
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2008 |
Jan
|
Feb
(6) |
Mar
(2) |
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2009 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
(1) |
Dec
(2) |
| 2010 |
Jan
(1) |
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2011 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
(1) |
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2013 |
Jan
|
Feb
(1) |
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2016 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
(1) |
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2020 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
(1) |
Dec
|
| 2021 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
(1) |
Dec
|
|
From: Yehuda R <yeh...@ho...> - 2006-11-10 17:57:50
|
Hi everybody, When I run Ndoc, it shows my classes and namespaces, but when I click on the parent .NET class link, it shows "the Page Cannot be Displayed". How do I fix this? thanks _________________________________________________________________ Get today's hot entertainment gossip http://movies.msn.com/movies/hotgossip?icid=T002MSN03A07001 |
|
From: Kunal L. <ale...@ec...> - 2006-10-30 20:09:25
|
sniffed my pack where I had dropped it next to me on the ground. Cheap VlAlGRA http://www.neradelionmasdefun.com =20 =20 No. Medical teams are stationed there in the hospital inside the |
|
From: Eric M. <ema...@no...> - 2006-10-25 17:59:14
|
David-
Thanks for the clarification, but the sentiment's the same. My
appreciation goes out to all involved.
Thanks for the link.
Regards-
Eric
On Wed Oct 25 10:54:12 PDT 2006, "Strickland,David"
<dst...@mn...> wrote:
> Tanks for the Kudos but all I did was hack up the 2003 Ndoc and
> try to get
> it to work in 2005 Kevin Downs is the real King of Ndoc. The
> M-Soft tool is
> SandCastle see:
>
> http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=E82EA71D-DA89-42EE-
> A715-696E3A4873B2&displaylang=en -----Original Message-----
> From: ndo...@li...
> [mailto:ndo...@li...]On Behalf Of
> Eric
> Marthinsen
> Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 12:42 PM
> To: ndo...@li...
> Subject: Re: [Ndoc-users] What happened to NDoc?
>
>
> Well, it was a fantastic utility for me. My hat's off the David
> for creating a great application. I'm disappointed to see that it
> is fading away.
>
> What is the name of the Microsoft tool that is going to handle
> creating documentation? I think it was in some sort of pre-alpha
> phase last time I took a look at it.
>
> Regards-
> Eric
>
>
> On Wed Oct 25 10:29:29 PDT 2006, Bill Swallow
> <tec...@gm...> wrote:
>
>> No offense, but unless it's an internationalized utility, it's
>> pretty
>> useless to us. Our SDKs are sold globally, and though code is
>> code,
>> localized content is desirable when explaining the object models.
>>
>> On 10/25/06, Strickland,David <dst...@mn...> wrote:
>>> I'm an American (small world view) never even thought of trying
>>> to globalize
>>> the thing just getting to work. Yes Ndoc05 and Ndoc 2005 beta
>>> are the same
>>> things. It's mostly just a hack I put together in about a week
>>> to get some
>>> basic functionality working. If anyone wants admin on it let me
>>> know. I
>>> currently don't have the time to keep working on it.
>>
>> -- Bill Swallow
>> HATT List Owner
>> WWP-Users List Owner
>> Senior Member STC, TechValley Chapter
>> http://techcommdood.blogspot.com
>> avid homebrewer and proud beer snob
>> "I see your OOO message and raise you a clue."
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services,
>> security?
>> Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make
>> your job easier
>> Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on
>> Apache Geronimo
>> http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ndoc-users mailing list
>> Ndo...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ndoc-users
>>
>>
>
> The information contained in this message is confidential,
> protected from disclosure and may be legally privileged. If the
> reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an
> employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure,
> distribution, copying, or any action taken or action omitted in
> reliance on it, is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If
> you have received this communication in error, please notify us
> immediately by replying to this message and destroy the material
> in its entirety, whether in electronic or hard copy format.
> Thank you.
>
>
|
|
From: Strickland,David <dst...@mn...> - 2006-10-25 17:55:17
|
Tanks for the Kudos but all I did was hack up the 2003 Ndoc and try to get it to work in 2005 Kevin Downs is the real King of Ndoc. The M-Soft tool is SandCastle see: http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=E82EA71D-DA89-42EE- A715-696E3A4873B2&displaylang=en -----Original Message----- From: ndo...@li... [mailto:ndo...@li...]On Behalf Of Eric Marthinsen Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 12:42 PM To: ndo...@li... Subject: Re: [Ndoc-users] What happened to NDoc? Well, it was a fantastic utility for me. My hat's off the David for creating a great application. I'm disappointed to see that it is fading away. What is the name of the Microsoft tool that is going to handle creating documentation? I think it was in some sort of pre-alpha phase last time I took a look at it. Regards- Eric On Wed Oct 25 10:29:29 PDT 2006, Bill Swallow <tec...@gm...> wrote: > No offense, but unless it's an internationalized utility, it's > pretty > useless to us. Our SDKs are sold globally, and though code is > code, > localized content is desirable when explaining the object models. > > On 10/25/06, Strickland,David <dst...@mn...> wrote: >> I'm an American (small world view) never even thought of trying >> to globalize >> the thing just getting to work. Yes Ndoc05 and Ndoc 2005 beta >> are the same >> things. It's mostly just a hack I put together in about a week >> to get some >> basic functionality working. If anyone wants admin on it let me >> know. I >> currently don't have the time to keep working on it. > > -- Bill Swallow > HATT List Owner > WWP-Users List Owner > Senior Member STC, TechValley Chapter > http://techcommdood.blogspot.com > avid homebrewer and proud beer snob > "I see your OOO message and raise you a clue." > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, > security? > Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make > your job easier > Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache > Geronimo > http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 > _______________________________________________ > Ndoc-users mailing list > Ndo...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ndoc-users > > The information contained in this message is confidential, protected from disclosure and may be legally privileged. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, distribution, copying, or any action taken or action omitted in reliance on it, is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to this message and destroy the material in its entirety, whether in electronic or hard copy format. Thank you. |
|
From: Eric M. <ema...@no...> - 2006-10-25 17:42:16
|
Well, it was a fantastic utility for me. My hat's off the David
for creating a great application. I'm disappointed to see that it
is fading away.
What is the name of the Microsoft tool that is going to handle
creating documentation? I think it was in some sort of pre-alpha
phase last time I took a look at it.
Regards-
Eric
On Wed Oct 25 10:29:29 PDT 2006, Bill Swallow
<tec...@gm...> wrote:
> No offense, but unless it's an internationalized utility, it's
> pretty
> useless to us. Our SDKs are sold globally, and though code is
> code,
> localized content is desirable when explaining the object models.
>
> On 10/25/06, Strickland,David <dst...@mn...> wrote:
>> I'm an American (small world view) never even thought of trying
>> to globalize
>> the thing just getting to work. Yes Ndoc05 and Ndoc 2005 beta
>> are the same
>> things. It's mostly just a hack I put together in about a week
>> to get some
>> basic functionality working. If anyone wants admin on it let me
>> know. I
>> currently don't have the time to keep working on it.
>
> -- Bill Swallow
> HATT List Owner
> WWP-Users List Owner
> Senior Member STC, TechValley Chapter
> http://techcommdood.blogspot.com
> avid homebrewer and proud beer snob
> "I see your OOO message and raise you a clue."
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services,
> security?
> Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make
> your job easier
> Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache
> Geronimo
> http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642
> _______________________________________________
> Ndoc-users mailing list
> Ndo...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ndoc-users
>
>
|
|
From: Bill S. <tec...@gm...> - 2006-10-25 17:29:36
|
No offense, but unless it's an internationalized utility, it's pretty useless to us. Our SDKs are sold globally, and though code is code, localized content is desirable when explaining the object models. On 10/25/06, Strickland,David <dst...@mn...> wrote: > I'm an American (small world view) never even thought of trying to globalize > the thing just getting to work. Yes Ndoc05 and Ndoc 2005 beta are the same > things. It's mostly just a hack I put together in about a week to get some > basic functionality working. If anyone wants admin on it let me know. I > currently don't have the time to keep working on it. -- Bill Swallow HATT List Owner WWP-Users List Owner Senior Member STC, TechValley Chapter http://techcommdood.blogspot.com avid homebrewer and proud beer snob "I see your OOO message and raise you a clue." |
|
From: Strickland,David <dst...@mn...> - 2006-10-25 17:08:02
|
I'm an American (small world view) never even thought of trying to globalize the thing just getting to work. Yes Ndoc05 and Ndoc 2005 beta are the same things. It's mostly just a hack I put together in about a week to get some basic functionality working. If anyone wants admin on it let me know. I currently don't have the time to keep working on it. -----Original Message----- From: ndo...@li... [mailto:ndo...@li...]On Behalf Of Bill Swallow Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 11:19 AM To: Strickland,David Cc: ndo...@li... Subject: Re: [Ndoc-users] What happened to NDoc? One of the biggest issues with Ndoc that I think anyone picking it up will find is that it was never internationalized. Parts of it may be internationalization-friendly, but on whole, there's a lot of hacking that needs to be done in order to really get it working for complete localized output. On 10/25/06, Strickland,David <dst...@mn...> wrote: > I started working on a rewrite some time ago calling it NDoc05 Got a little > ways on it however. I started to realize all the obstacles to getting NDoc > working again. > > >From what I can tell looking at the code NDoc was built on top of the > MSHelpCompiler. In essence it appears that NDoc started out as an automation > system for the mshelp compiler then gradually additional outputs and options > were added. > > The MSHelp compiler is a Com app that M-Soft no longer supports nor are they > planning on upgrading it. As a result In order to get Ndoc back up to par > all the functionality of the MSHelp Compiler would have to be reverse > engineer and recoded. Perhaps this would be possible if Someone could talk > M-Soft into releasing the source for MSHelpCompiller to the community so we > could upgrade and support it but FTO. > > The only other option is to down grade NDoc to a simple XML\XSL engine that > applies different XSL Files to the xml to produce the output but that is > hardly what the community is looking for. > > Roomer has it that M-Soft is releasing their own Idea of what an automated > Documenter should be sometime in the next couple decades and until then > several for purchase options have come on the scene that should work for > most teams that seriously want documentation. As for a free version for > small shops you'll have to wait and see. Maybe your grandkids will be able > to use M-Softs version that is of course unless they decide to package it > into Team Monstrosity. > > Just my 27.3 cents > Dave > > -----Original Message----- > From: ndo...@li... > [mailto:ndo...@li...]On Behalf Of Bill > Swallow > Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 9:56 AM > To: Keith Bourgoin > Cc: ndo...@li... > Subject: Re: [Ndoc-users] What happened to NDoc? > > > Ndoc is no longer being developed. At least, no one has picked up the > torch. Kevin ceased all development about a half year ago or so. His > reasons are posted in the archives. > > Microsoft is offering their code documenter for public use now. Google > for "Sandcastle". > > On 10/25/06, Keith Bourgoin <kbo...@ne...> wrote: > > > > I'm looking at using NDoc to do some documentation on a project, but what > > happened to NDoc? Is it still under active development, or is there > > something else out there for making this documentation that's taken its > > place. I just noticed that there haven't been any updates for over a year > > and I had to use a work-around to get it to work with VS2005. Any > > information would be really helpful. > > -- > Bill Swallow > HATT List Owner > WWP-Users List Owner > Senior Member STC, TechValley Chapter > http://techcommdood.blogspot.com > avid homebrewer and proud beer snob > "I see your OOO message and raise you a clue." > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? > Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job > easier > Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo > http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 > _______________________________________________ > Ndoc-users mailing list > Ndo...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ndoc-users > > > The information contained in this message is confidential, protected from disclosure and may be legally privileged. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, distribution, copying, or any action taken or action omitted in reliance on it, is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to this message and destroy the material in its entirety, whether in electronic or hard copy format. Thank you. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? > Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier > Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo > http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 > _______________________________________________ > Ndoc-users mailing list > Ndo...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ndoc-users > -- Bill Swallow HATT List Owner WWP-Users List Owner Senior Member STC, TechValley Chapter http://techcommdood.blogspot.com avid homebrewer and proud beer snob "I see your OOO message and raise you a clue." ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Ndoc-users mailing list Ndo...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ndoc-users The information contained in this message is confidential, protected from disclosure and may be legally privileged. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, distribution, copying, or any action taken or action omitted in reliance on it, is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to this message and destroy the material in its entirety, whether in electronic or hard copy format. Thank you. |
|
From: John S. <js...@im...> - 2006-10-25 16:51:55
|
There exists a project that is a fork of NDoc - called NDoc 2005. I am not sure if this is the same as that referenced in an earlier e-mail or not... http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=3D163095 I was able to download the source for NDoc2005Beta and such, then open them in VS 2005 and compile. Everything has been working fine, but I don't use anything advanced, just enough to build msdn and windows help type of documents. HTH, John Sacks Senior Programmer/Analyst E-Mail: js...@im... Phone: (412)820-8807 x2325 =20 >-----Original Message----- >From: ndo...@li...=20 >[mailto:ndo...@li...] On Behalf Of=20 >Bill Swallow >Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 12:19 PM >To: Strickland,David >Cc: ndo...@li... >Subject: Re: [Ndoc-users] What happened to NDoc? > >One of the biggest issues with Ndoc that I think anyone picking it up >will find is that it was never internationalized. Parts of it may be >internationalization-friendly, but on whole, there's a lot of hacking >that needs to be done in order to really get it working for complete >localized output. > >On 10/25/06, Strickland,David <dst...@mn...> wrote: >> I started working on a rewrite some time ago calling it=20 >NDoc05 Got a little >> ways on it however. I started to realize all the obstacles=20 >to getting NDoc >> working again. >> >> >From what I can tell looking at the code NDoc was built on=20 >top of the >> MSHelpCompiler. In essence it appears that NDoc started out=20 >as an automation >> system for the mshelp compiler then gradually additional=20 >outputs and options >> were added. >> >> The MSHelp compiler is a Com app that M-Soft no longer=20 >supports nor are they >> planning on upgrading it. As a result In order to get Ndoc=20 >back up to par >> all the functionality of the MSHelp Compiler would have to be reverse >> engineer and recoded. Perhaps this would be possible if=20 >Someone could talk >> M-Soft into releasing the source for MSHelpCompiller to the=20 >community so we >> could upgrade and support it but FTO. >> >> The only other option is to down grade NDoc to a simple=20 >XML\XSL engine that >> applies different XSL Files to the xml to produce the output=20 >but that is >> hardly what the community is looking for. >> >> Roomer has it that M-Soft is releasing their own Idea of=20 >what an automated >> Documenter should be sometime in the next couple decades and=20 >until then >> several for purchase options have come on the scene that=20 >should work for >> most teams that seriously want documentation. As for a free=20 >version for >> small shops you'll have to wait and see. Maybe your=20 >grandkids will be able >> to use M-Softs version that is of course unless they decide=20 >to package it >> into Team Monstrosity. >> >> Just my 27.3 cents >> Dave >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: ndo...@li... >> [mailto:ndo...@li...]On Behalf Of Bill >> Swallow >> Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 9:56 AM >> To: Keith Bourgoin >> Cc: ndo...@li... >> Subject: Re: [Ndoc-users] What happened to NDoc? >> >> >> Ndoc is no longer being developed. At least, no one has picked up the >> torch. Kevin ceased all development about a half year ago or so. His >> reasons are posted in the archives. >> >> Microsoft is offering their code documenter for public use=20 >now. Google >> for "Sandcastle". >> >> On 10/25/06, Keith Bourgoin <kbo...@ne...> wrote: >> > >> > I'm looking at using NDoc to do some documentation on a=20 >project, but what >> > happened to NDoc? Is it still under active development,=20 >or is there >> > something else out there for making this documentation=20 >that's taken its >> > place. I just noticed that there haven't been any updates=20 >for over a year >> > and I had to use a work-around to get it to work with VS2005. Any >> > information would be really helpful. >> >> -- >> Bill Swallow >> HATT List Owner >> WWP-Users List Owner >> Senior Member STC, TechValley Chapter >> http://techcommdood.blogspot.com >> avid homebrewer and proud beer snob >> "I see your OOO message and raise you a clue." >> >>=20 >--------------------------------------------------------------- >---------- >> Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web=20 >services, security? >> Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to=20 >make your job >> easier >> Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on=20 >Apache Geronimo >>=20 >http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=3Dlnk&kid=3D120709&bid=3D263057&d at=3D121642 >> _______________________________________________ >> Ndoc-users mailing list >> Ndo...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ndoc-users >> >> >> The information contained in this message is confidential,=20 >protected from disclosure and may be legally privileged. If=20 >the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an=20 >employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to=20 >the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any=20 >disclosure, distribution, copying, or any action taken or=20 >action omitted in reliance on it, is strictly prohibited and=20 >may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in=20 >error, please notify us immediately by replying to this=20 >message and destroy the material in its entirety, whether in=20 >electronic or hard copy format. Thank you. >> >>=20 >--------------------------------------------------------------- >---------- >> Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web=20 >services, security? >> Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to=20 >make your job easier >> Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on=20 >Apache Geronimo >>=20 >http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=3Dlnk&kid=3D120709&bid=3D263057&d at=3D121642 >> _______________________________________________ >> Ndoc-users mailing list >> Ndo...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ndoc-users >> > > >--=20 >Bill Swallow >HATT List Owner >WWP-Users List Owner >Senior Member STC, TechValley Chapter >http://techcommdood.blogspot.com >avid homebrewer and proud beer snob >"I see your OOO message and raise you a clue." > >--------------------------------------------------------------- >---------- >Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web=20 >services, security? >Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make=20 >your job easier >Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on=20 >Apache Geronimo >http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=3Dlnk&kid=3D120709&bid=3D263057&d at=3D121642 >_______________________________________________ >Ndoc-users mailing list >Ndo...@li... >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ndoc-users > |
|
From: Bill S. <tec...@gm...> - 2006-10-25 16:19:35
|
One of the biggest issues with Ndoc that I think anyone picking it up will find is that it was never internationalized. Parts of it may be internationalization-friendly, but on whole, there's a lot of hacking that needs to be done in order to really get it working for complete localized output. On 10/25/06, Strickland,David <dst...@mn...> wrote: > I started working on a rewrite some time ago calling it NDoc05 Got a little > ways on it however. I started to realize all the obstacles to getting NDoc > working again. > > >From what I can tell looking at the code NDoc was built on top of the > MSHelpCompiler. In essence it appears that NDoc started out as an automation > system for the mshelp compiler then gradually additional outputs and options > were added. > > The MSHelp compiler is a Com app that M-Soft no longer supports nor are they > planning on upgrading it. As a result In order to get Ndoc back up to par > all the functionality of the MSHelp Compiler would have to be reverse > engineer and recoded. Perhaps this would be possible if Someone could talk > M-Soft into releasing the source for MSHelpCompiller to the community so we > could upgrade and support it but FTO. > > The only other option is to down grade NDoc to a simple XML\XSL engine that > applies different XSL Files to the xml to produce the output but that is > hardly what the community is looking for. > > Roomer has it that M-Soft is releasing their own Idea of what an automated > Documenter should be sometime in the next couple decades and until then > several for purchase options have come on the scene that should work for > most teams that seriously want documentation. As for a free version for > small shops you'll have to wait and see. Maybe your grandkids will be able > to use M-Softs version that is of course unless they decide to package it > into Team Monstrosity. > > Just my 27.3 cents > Dave > > -----Original Message----- > From: ndo...@li... > [mailto:ndo...@li...]On Behalf Of Bill > Swallow > Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 9:56 AM > To: Keith Bourgoin > Cc: ndo...@li... > Subject: Re: [Ndoc-users] What happened to NDoc? > > > Ndoc is no longer being developed. At least, no one has picked up the > torch. Kevin ceased all development about a half year ago or so. His > reasons are posted in the archives. > > Microsoft is offering their code documenter for public use now. Google > for "Sandcastle". > > On 10/25/06, Keith Bourgoin <kbo...@ne...> wrote: > > > > I'm looking at using NDoc to do some documentation on a project, but what > > happened to NDoc? Is it still under active development, or is there > > something else out there for making this documentation that's taken its > > place. I just noticed that there haven't been any updates for over a year > > and I had to use a work-around to get it to work with VS2005. Any > > information would be really helpful. > > -- > Bill Swallow > HATT List Owner > WWP-Users List Owner > Senior Member STC, TechValley Chapter > http://techcommdood.blogspot.com > avid homebrewer and proud beer snob > "I see your OOO message and raise you a clue." > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? > Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job > easier > Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo > http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 > _______________________________________________ > Ndoc-users mailing list > Ndo...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ndoc-users > > > The information contained in this message is confidential, protected from disclosure and may be legally privileged. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, distribution, copying, or any action taken or action omitted in reliance on it, is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to this message and destroy the material in its entirety, whether in electronic or hard copy format. Thank you. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? > Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier > Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo > http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 > _______________________________________________ > Ndoc-users mailing list > Ndo...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ndoc-users > -- Bill Swallow HATT List Owner WWP-Users List Owner Senior Member STC, TechValley Chapter http://techcommdood.blogspot.com avid homebrewer and proud beer snob "I see your OOO message and raise you a clue." |
|
From: Simon D. <sim...@gm...> - 2006-10-25 16:14:48
|
> > > Roomer has it that M-Soft is releasing their own Idea of what an automated > Documenter should be sometime in the next couple decades and until then > several for purchase options have come on the scene that should work for > most teams that seriously want documentation. As for a free version for > small shops you'll have to wait and see. Maybe your grandkids will be able > to use M-Softs version that is of course unless they decide to package it > into Team Monstrosity. > Microsoft has released CTP versions of Sandcastle a few monts back already, http://blogs.msdn.com/sandcastle is a good starting point. Currently that is highly manual and frustrating to do by hand, but Eric Woodruff has created Sandcastle Help File Builder to make the process more manageable at codeplex (http://www.codeplex.com/Wiki/View.aspx?ProjectName=SHFB) that looks and feels almost like NDoc. The mshelp2 compiler is packaged in Visual Studio SDK though (freely downloadable, after accepting EULA) /Simon |
|
From: Strickland,David <dst...@mn...> - 2006-10-25 16:06:28
|
I started working on a rewrite some time ago calling it NDoc05 Got a little ways on it however. I started to realize all the obstacles to getting NDoc working again. >From what I can tell looking at the code NDoc was built on top of the MSHelpCompiler. In essence it appears that NDoc started out as an automation system for the mshelp compiler then gradually additional outputs and options were added. The MSHelp compiler is a Com app that M-Soft no longer supports nor are they planning on upgrading it. As a result In order to get Ndoc back up to par all the functionality of the MSHelp Compiler would have to be reverse engineer and recoded. Perhaps this would be possible if Someone could talk M-Soft into releasing the source for MSHelpCompiller to the community so we could upgrade and support it but FTO. The only other option is to down grade NDoc to a simple XML\XSL engine that applies different XSL Files to the xml to produce the output but that is hardly what the community is looking for. Roomer has it that M-Soft is releasing their own Idea of what an automated Documenter should be sometime in the next couple decades and until then several for purchase options have come on the scene that should work for most teams that seriously want documentation. As for a free version for small shops you'll have to wait and see. Maybe your grandkids will be able to use M-Softs version that is of course unless they decide to package it into Team Monstrosity. Just my 27.3 cents Dave -----Original Message----- From: ndo...@li... [mailto:ndo...@li...]On Behalf Of Bill Swallow Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 9:56 AM To: Keith Bourgoin Cc: ndo...@li... Subject: Re: [Ndoc-users] What happened to NDoc? Ndoc is no longer being developed. At least, no one has picked up the torch. Kevin ceased all development about a half year ago or so. His reasons are posted in the archives. Microsoft is offering their code documenter for public use now. Google for "Sandcastle". On 10/25/06, Keith Bourgoin <kbo...@ne...> wrote: > > I'm looking at using NDoc to do some documentation on a project, but what > happened to NDoc? Is it still under active development, or is there > something else out there for making this documentation that's taken its > place. I just noticed that there haven't been any updates for over a year > and I had to use a work-around to get it to work with VS2005. Any > information would be really helpful. -- Bill Swallow HATT List Owner WWP-Users List Owner Senior Member STC, TechValley Chapter http://techcommdood.blogspot.com avid homebrewer and proud beer snob "I see your OOO message and raise you a clue." ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Ndoc-users mailing list Ndo...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ndoc-users The information contained in this message is confidential, protected from disclosure and may be legally privileged. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, distribution, copying, or any action taken or action omitted in reliance on it, is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to this message and destroy the material in its entirety, whether in electronic or hard copy format. Thank you. |
|
From: Bill S. <tec...@gm...> - 2006-10-25 14:55:39
|
Ndoc is no longer being developed. At least, no one has picked up the torch. Kevin ceased all development about a half year ago or so. His reasons are posted in the archives. Microsoft is offering their code documenter for public use now. Google for "Sandcastle". On 10/25/06, Keith Bourgoin <kbo...@ne...> wrote: > > I'm looking at using NDoc to do some documentation on a project, but what > happened to NDoc? Is it still under active development, or is there > something else out there for making this documentation that's taken its > place. I just noticed that there haven't been any updates for over a year > and I had to use a work-around to get it to work with VS2005. Any > information would be really helpful. -- Bill Swallow HATT List Owner WWP-Users List Owner Senior Member STC, TechValley Chapter http://techcommdood.blogspot.com avid homebrewer and proud beer snob "I see your OOO message and raise you a clue." |
|
From: Keith B. <kbo...@ne...> - 2006-10-25 14:04:22
|
Hey, =20 I'm looking at using NDoc to do some documentation on a project, but what happened to NDoc? Is it still under active development, or is there something else out there for making this documentation that's taken its place. I just noticed that there haven't been any updates for over a year and I had to use a work-around to get it to work with VS2005. Any information would be really helpful. Thanks, =20 --keith. |
|
From: Wilson R. T <rob...@br...> - 2006-10-23 14:34:45
|
Thank you for your comments. In fact I am using C++/CLI but the same principle applies. I will consult with my team members and we will consider that. Thank you all very much, Robin _____ From: ndo...@li... [mailto:ndo...@li...] On Behalf Of Way, Richard Sent: 23 October 2006 15:33 To: ndo...@li... Subject: Re: [Ndoc-users] Documenting functions which are *not* in a class 1) I'm guessing you're using C#, so I can't easily toss out perfect syntax. But in Vb.Net I would use a public shared class, with the same signature that just pass those parameters on to the actual function. 2) They would appear that way, but you could give the class a very generic name like "UnclassedFunctions" or something of the like. Or you could create an Unclassed namespace and add a series of classes to it to help create an organizational distinction to each wrapper. -Rick _____ From: ndo...@li... [mailto:ndo...@li...] On Behalf Of Wilson Robin T Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 8:45 AM To: ndo...@li... Subject: Re: [Ndoc-users] Documenting functions which are *not* in a class Good point, I don't actually have to then use the class in code. Two questions though: 1) How would I easily wrap all my standalone functions, which are in multiple files, into one class? 2) How would I ensure that the documentation NDoc produced did not say that these procedures were in Class xxx (because in the real system they won't be)? Cheers, Robin _____ From: Way, Richard [mailto:rw...@gf...] Sent: 23 October 2006 14:43 To: Wilson Robin T; ndo...@li... Subject: RE: [Ndoc-users] Documenting functions which are *not* in a class Why not create a .Net wrapper class. Not that you have to use it in code, but it should at least give you a way to get documentation of the methods. -Rick _____ From: ndo...@li... [mailto:ndo...@li...] On Behalf Of Wilson Robin T Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 8:34 AM To: ndo...@li... Subject: Re: [Ndoc-users] Documenting functions which are *not* in a class Hi all, Thanks for your replies. Unfortunately it is not really feasible to move the code into a .Net class, due to reasons that Oliver mentioned about how memory is dealt with in managed classes. Unless anyone else has any other ideas then presumably that means that I can't use XML documentation in my code. If so, that's a great shame, as it would make things vastly easier for me, but I'm sure I can manage to do it another way. Thanks for all your help, Robin _____ From: Olivier DALET [mailto:od...@gm...] Sent: 23 October 2006 08:03 To: Wim Coenen Cc: Wilson Robin T; ndo...@li... Subject: Re: [Ndoc-users] Documenting functions which are *not* in a class I agree with Wim: In .NET, functions don't exist and a method can't be defined outside of a class (or a structure). C++ allows this kind of construction. Thus your functions "which are not in a class" are regular C++ functions and they can't, by definition, be expressed by any .NET language. Indeed, these functions are compiled to native code and mixed with .NET code in the resulting assembly. It can be a solution to wrap these functions into a .NET class, but only if you don't rely on some native code behavior. If you do so, pay attention to the way you manage memory (native unmanaged pointers and .NET references (managed by the GC) are not quite the same), be careful with strings too. I'm not a managed C++ expert, but this may prove not to be a trivial task. PS: I don't know if you're using the .NET 1 or .NET 2 flavor of Managed C++, but be aware of the fact that even if the latter recognizes the older syntax, there are differences. And so, you may pay attention to this if grabbing samples on the net. Best regards, Olivier DALET On 10/22/06, Wim Coenen <wc...@gm... <mailto:wc...@gm...> > wrote: Your assembly does not contain metadata for those functions because it is a "mixed assembly" with both dotnet IL instructions and native instructions, something which only occurs when compiling "c++ with managed extensions" as far as I can tell. The native part has no dotnet metadata, and is thus invisible to other dotnet assemblies, like the reflector or ndoc application. I would try to move or wrap one of those global function in a static method of a __gc class called "GlobalFuncs", and document it there. Since the "GlobalFuncs" class is managed, it should be visible to ndoc. 2006/10/19, Wilson Robin T <rob...@br... <mailto:rob...@br...> >: > Hi, > > Thanks for your response - sorry for the delay in replying, I've been out of > the office for quite a while. > > I've had a look with the .Net Reflector, and I can't find my standalone > functions in there at all! I'm not sure how my program is working then...I > am using Visual C++ .Net and have some old-style C++ global functions which > don't seem to be appearing in the reflector, but the code is accessing them > fine! How weird! > > Dose anyone know if there's any way I can get them to appear in the > reflector? Or, if there's any way that I can get them to be documented using > NDoc? > > Cheers, > > Robin > > -----Original Message----- > From: Wim Coenen [mailto: wc...@gm... <mailto:wc...@gm...> ] > Sent: 09 October 2006 16:26 > To: Wilson Robin T > Cc: ndo...@li... <mailto:ndo...@li...> > Subject: Re: [Ndoc-users] Documenting functions which are *not* in a class > > 2006/10/6, Wilson Robin T > <rob...@br... <mailto:rob...@br...> >: > > I have lots of functions which are just in separate .cpp files with no > > membership of a class (or even a namespace - though I wouldn't mind > > making them members of a namespace if that would help). Is there any > > way to document these functions using NDoc? If I look at the XML that > > Visual Studio spits out then it does list those functions which aren't > > in a class - NDoc just doesn't seem to do anything with it. > > > > I don't use visual studio or write code in c++, so I obviously cannot > reproduce this problem. However, I do know that dotNET assemblies never > contain standalone functions. Dotnet compilers for languages which do have > this feature (e.g. delphi) have to put such functions in a special class. > > Now if NDOC encounters a member element which for some reason does not match > the CLR metadata of anything in the compiled assembly, then it will ignore > the element. To find out if this is your problem, take a look at your > assembly (e.g. with Lutz Roeder's .NET Reflector), find out in which > namespace+class your function ended up, and then compare that with the XML > element. > > That should shed some more light on the cause of your problem. > > HTH, > Wim Coenen. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk <http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642> &kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Ndoc-users mailing list Ndo...@li... <mailto:Ndo...@li...> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ndoc-users <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ndoc-users> -- Olivier DALET --------------------------------- http://odalet.wordpress.com <http://odalet.wordpress.com> http://aspadvice.com/blogs/oliviers_net_blog <http://aspadvice.com/blogs/oliviers_net_blog> |* This e-mail, and any attachments, is confidential and for the use of the addressee only. |* If you are not the intended recipient, please telephone +44 (0) 1506 408700 |* We do not accept legal responsibility for this e-mail or any viruses. |* All e-mails sent and received by us are monitored. |* Contracts cannot be concluded with us by e-mail. |* This message has been sent from a member of the British Energy Group (the "Group"). |* The parent company of the Group is British Energy Group plc, registered number 270184, and having its registered office at |* Systems House, Alba Campus, Livingston EH54 7EG ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------- The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this transmission in error, please contact the sender or call 800-333-5905 ext. 6259, and delete the material from all computers. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------- The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this transmission in error, please contact the sender or call 800-333-5905 ext. 6259, and delete the material from all computers. |
|
From: Way, R. <rw...@gf...> - 2006-10-23 14:32:41
|
1) I'm guessing you're using C#, so I can't easily toss out perfect syntax. But in Vb.Net I would use a public shared class, with the same signature that just pass those parameters on to the actual function. 2) They would appear that way, but you could give the class a very generic name like "UnclassedFunctions" or something of the like. Or you could create an Unclassed namespace and add a series of classes to it to help create an organizational distinction to each wrapper. =20 -Rick =20 _____ =20 From: ndo...@li... [mailto:ndo...@li...] On Behalf Of Wilson Robin T Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 8:45 AM To: ndo...@li... Subject: Re: [Ndoc-users] Documenting functions which are *not* in a class =20 Good point, I don't actually have to then use the class in code. Two questions though: =20 1) How would I easily wrap all my standalone functions, which are in multiple files, into one class? =20 2) How would I ensure that the documentation NDoc produced did not say that these procedures were in Class xxx (because in the real system they won't be)? =20 Cheers, =20 Robin =20 _____ =20 From: Way, Richard [mailto:rw...@gf...]=20 Sent: 23 October 2006 14:43 To: Wilson Robin T; ndo...@li... Subject: RE: [Ndoc-users] Documenting functions which are *not* in a class Why not create a .Net wrapper class. Not that you have to use it in code, but it should at least give you a way to get documentation of the methods. =20 -Rick =20 _____ =20 From: ndo...@li... [mailto:ndo...@li...] On Behalf Of Wilson Robin T Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 8:34 AM To: ndo...@li... Subject: Re: [Ndoc-users] Documenting functions which are *not* in a class =20 Hi all, =20 Thanks for your replies. Unfortunately it is not really feasible to move the code into a .Net class, due to reasons that Oliver mentioned about how memory is dealt with in managed classes. =20 Unless anyone else has any other ideas then presumably that means that I can't use XML documentation in my code. If so, that's a great shame, as it would make things vastly easier for me, but I'm sure I can manage to do it another way. =20 Thanks for all your help, =20 Robin =20 _____ =20 From: Olivier DALET [mailto:od...@gm...]=20 Sent: 23 October 2006 08:03 To: Wim Coenen Cc: Wilson Robin T; ndo...@li... Subject: Re: [Ndoc-users] Documenting functions which are *not* in a class I agree with Wim: In .NET, functions don't exist and a method can't be defined outside of a class (or a structure). C++ allows this kind of construction. Thus your functions "which are not in a class" are regular C++ functions and they can't, by definition, be expressed by any .NET language. Indeed, these functions are compiled to native code and mixed with .NET code in the resulting assembly.=20 It can be a solution to wrap these functions into a .NET class, but only if you don't rely on some native code behavior. If you do so, pay attention to the way you manage memory (native unmanaged pointers and .NET references (managed by the GC) are not quite the same), be careful with strings too. I'm not a managed C++ expert, but this may prove not to be a trivial task.=20 PS: I don't know if you're using the .NET 1 or .NET 2 flavor of Managed C++, but be aware of the fact that even if the latter recognizes the older syntax, there are differences. And so, you may pay attention to this if grabbing samples on the net.=20 Best regards, Olivier DALET On 10/22/06, Wim Coenen <wc...@gm...> wrote:=20 Your assembly does not contain metadata for those functions because it is a "mixed assembly" with both dotnet IL instructions and native instructions, something which only occurs when compiling "c++ with managed extensions" as far as I can tell. The native part has=20 no dotnet metadata, and is thus invisible to other dotnet assemblies, like the reflector or ndoc application. I would try to move or wrap one of those global function in a static method of a __gc class called "GlobalFuncs", and document it there. Since the=20 "GlobalFuncs" class is managed, it should be visible to ndoc. 2006/10/19, Wilson Robin T <rob...@br...>: > Hi, > > Thanks for your response - sorry for the delay in replying, I've been out of > the office for quite a while. > > I've had a look with the .Net Reflector, and I can't find my standalone > functions in there at all! I'm not sure how my program is working then...I=20 > am using Visual C++ .Net and have some old-style C++ global functions which > don't seem to be appearing in the reflector, but the code is accessing them > fine! How weird! > > Dose anyone know if there's any way I can get them to appear in the=20 > reflector? Or, if there's any way that I can get them to be documented using > NDoc? > > Cheers, > > Robin > > -----Original Message----- > From: Wim Coenen [mailto: wc...@gm...] > Sent: 09 October 2006 16:26 > To: Wilson Robin T > Cc: ndo...@li... > Subject: Re: [Ndoc-users] Documenting functions which are *not* in a class > > 2006/10/6, Wilson Robin T > <rob...@br... >: > > I have lots of functions which are just in separate .cpp files with no > > membership of a class (or even a namespace - though I wouldn't mind > > making them members of a namespace if that would help). Is there any > > way to document these functions using NDoc? If I look at the XML that > > Visual Studio spits out then it does list those functions which aren't > > in a class - NDoc just doesn't seem to do anything with it.=20 > > > > I don't use visual studio or write code in c++, so I obviously cannot > reproduce this problem. However, I do know that dotNET assemblies never > contain standalone functions. Dotnet compilers for languages which do have=20 > this feature (e.g. delphi) have to put such functions in a special class. > > Now if NDOC encounters a member element which for some reason does not match > the CLR metadata of anything in the compiled assembly, then it will ignore=20 > the element. To find out if this is your problem, take a look at your > assembly (e.g. with Lutz Roeder's .NET Reflector), find out in which > namespace+class your function ended up, and then compare that with the XML=20 > element. > > That should shed some more light on the cause of your problem. > > HTH, > Wim Coenen. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ - Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo=20 http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=3Dlnk&kid=3D120709&bid=3D263057&dat=3D1= 21642 _______________________________________________=20 Ndoc-users mailing list Ndo...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ndoc-users=20 --=20 Olivier DALET --------------------------------- http://odalet.wordpress.com http://aspadvice.com/blogs/oliviers_net_blog=20 |* This e-mail, and any attachments, is confidential and for the use of the addressee only. |* If you are not the intended recipient, please telephone +44 (0) 1506 408700 =20 |* We do not accept legal responsibility for this e-mail or any viruses. =20 |* All e-mails sent and received by us are monitored. =20 |* Contracts cannot be concluded with us by e-mail. =20 |* This message has been sent from a member of the British Energy Group (the "Group"). =20 |* The parent company of the Group is British Energy Group plc, registered number 270184, and having its registered office at |* Systems House, Alba Campus, Livingston EH54 7EG =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---------------=20 The information transmitted is intended only for the person or =20 entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential =20 and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, =20 dissemination or other use of this information by persons or =20 entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. =20 If you received this transmission in error, please contact the =20 sender or call 800-333-5905 ext. 6259, and delete the material =20 from all computers. =20 =20 =20 =20 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------= ------------=20 The information transmitted is intended only for the person or =20 entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential =20 and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, =20 dissemination or other use of this information by persons or =20 entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. =20 If you received this transmission in error, please contact the =20 sender or call 800-333-5905 ext. 6259, and delete the material =20 from all computers. |
|
From: Benjamin W. <bw...@co...> - 2006-10-23 13:48:08
|
Unsubscribe me, please. =20 Thanks. |
|
From: Wilson R. T <rob...@br...> - 2006-10-23 13:45:39
|
Good point, I don't actually have to then use the class in code. Two questions though: 1) How would I easily wrap all my standalone functions, which are in multiple files, into one class? 2) How would I ensure that the documentation NDoc produced did not say that these procedures were in Class xxx (because in the real system they won't be)? Cheers, Robin _____ From: Way, Richard [mailto:rw...@gf...] Sent: 23 October 2006 14:43 To: Wilson Robin T; ndo...@li... Subject: RE: [Ndoc-users] Documenting functions which are *not* in a class Why not create a .Net wrapper class. Not that you have to use it in code, but it should at least give you a way to get documentation of the methods. -Rick _____ From: ndo...@li... [mailto:ndo...@li...] On Behalf Of Wilson Robin T Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 8:34 AM To: ndo...@li... Subject: Re: [Ndoc-users] Documenting functions which are *not* in a class Hi all, Thanks for your replies. Unfortunately it is not really feasible to move the code into a .Net class, due to reasons that Oliver mentioned about how memory is dealt with in managed classes. Unless anyone else has any other ideas then presumably that means that I can't use XML documentation in my code. If so, that's a great shame, as it would make things vastly easier for me, but I'm sure I can manage to do it another way. Thanks for all your help, Robin _____ From: Olivier DALET [mailto:od...@gm...] Sent: 23 October 2006 08:03 To: Wim Coenen Cc: Wilson Robin T; ndo...@li... Subject: Re: [Ndoc-users] Documenting functions which are *not* in a class I agree with Wim: In .NET, functions don't exist and a method can't be defined outside of a class (or a structure). C++ allows this kind of construction. Thus your functions "which are not in a class" are regular C++ functions and they can't, by definition, be expressed by any .NET language. Indeed, these functions are compiled to native code and mixed with .NET code in the resulting assembly. It can be a solution to wrap these functions into a .NET class, but only if you don't rely on some native code behavior. If you do so, pay attention to the way you manage memory (native unmanaged pointers and .NET references (managed by the GC) are not quite the same), be careful with strings too. I'm not a managed C++ expert, but this may prove not to be a trivial task. PS: I don't know if you're using the .NET 1 or .NET 2 flavor of Managed C++, but be aware of the fact that even if the latter recognizes the older syntax, there are differences. And so, you may pay attention to this if grabbing samples on the net. Best regards, Olivier DALET On 10/22/06, Wim Coenen <wc...@gm... <mailto:wc...@gm...> > wrote: Your assembly does not contain metadata for those functions because it is a "mixed assembly" with both dotnet IL instructions and native instructions, something which only occurs when compiling "c++ with managed extensions" as far as I can tell. The native part has no dotnet metadata, and is thus invisible to other dotnet assemblies, like the reflector or ndoc application. I would try to move or wrap one of those global function in a static method of a __gc class called "GlobalFuncs", and document it there. Since the "GlobalFuncs" class is managed, it should be visible to ndoc. 2006/10/19, Wilson Robin T <rob...@br... <mailto:rob...@br...> >: > Hi, > > Thanks for your response - sorry for the delay in replying, I've been out of > the office for quite a while. > > I've had a look with the .Net Reflector, and I can't find my standalone > functions in there at all! I'm not sure how my program is working then...I > am using Visual C++ .Net and have some old-style C++ global functions which > don't seem to be appearing in the reflector, but the code is accessing them > fine! How weird! > > Dose anyone know if there's any way I can get them to appear in the > reflector? Or, if there's any way that I can get them to be documented using > NDoc? > > Cheers, > > Robin > > -----Original Message----- > From: Wim Coenen [mailto: wc...@gm... <mailto:wc...@gm...> ] > Sent: 09 October 2006 16:26 > To: Wilson Robin T > Cc: ndo...@li... <mailto:ndo...@li...> > Subject: Re: [Ndoc-users] Documenting functions which are *not* in a class > > 2006/10/6, Wilson Robin T > <rob...@br... <mailto:rob...@br...> >: > > I have lots of functions which are just in separate .cpp files with no > > membership of a class (or even a namespace - though I wouldn't mind > > making them members of a namespace if that would help). Is there any > > way to document these functions using NDoc? If I look at the XML that > > Visual Studio spits out then it does list those functions which aren't > > in a class - NDoc just doesn't seem to do anything with it. > > > > I don't use visual studio or write code in c++, so I obviously cannot > reproduce this problem. However, I do know that dotNET assemblies never > contain standalone functions. Dotnet compilers for languages which do have > this feature (e.g. delphi) have to put such functions in a special class. > > Now if NDOC encounters a member element which for some reason does not match > the CLR metadata of anything in the compiled assembly, then it will ignore > the element. To find out if this is your problem, take a look at your > assembly (e.g. with Lutz Roeder's .NET Reflector), find out in which > namespace+class your function ended up, and then compare that with the XML > element. > > That should shed some more light on the cause of your problem. > > HTH, > Wim Coenen. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk <http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642> &kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Ndoc-users mailing list Ndo...@li... <mailto:Ndo...@li...> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ndoc-users <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ndoc-users> -- Olivier DALET --------------------------------- http://odalet.wordpress.com <http://odalet.wordpress.com> http://aspadvice.com/blogs/oliviers_net_blog <http://aspadvice.com/blogs/oliviers_net_blog> |* This e-mail, and any attachments, is confidential and for the use of the addressee only. |* If you are not the intended recipient, please telephone +44 (0) 1506 408700 |* We do not accept legal responsibility for this e-mail or any viruses. |* All e-mails sent and received by us are monitored. |* Contracts cannot be concluded with us by e-mail. |* This message has been sent from a member of the British Energy Group (the "Group"). |* The parent company of the Group is British Energy Group plc, registered number 270184, and having its registered office at |* Systems House, Alba Campus, Livingston EH54 7EG ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------- The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this transmission in error, please contact the sender or call 800-333-5905 ext. 6259, and delete the material from all computers. |
|
From: Way, R. <rw...@gf...> - 2006-10-23 13:43:26
|
Why not create a .Net wrapper class. Not that you have to use it in code, but it should at least give you a way to get documentation of the methods. =20 -Rick =20 _____ =20 From: ndo...@li... [mailto:ndo...@li...] On Behalf Of Wilson Robin T Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 8:34 AM To: ndo...@li... Subject: Re: [Ndoc-users] Documenting functions which are *not* in a class =20 Hi all, =20 Thanks for your replies. Unfortunately it is not really feasible to move the code into a .Net class, due to reasons that Oliver mentioned about how memory is dealt with in managed classes. =20 Unless anyone else has any other ideas then presumably that means that I can't use XML documentation in my code. If so, that's a great shame, as it would make things vastly easier for me, but I'm sure I can manage to do it another way. =20 Thanks for all your help, =20 Robin =20 _____ =20 From: Olivier DALET [mailto:od...@gm...]=20 Sent: 23 October 2006 08:03 To: Wim Coenen Cc: Wilson Robin T; ndo...@li... Subject: Re: [Ndoc-users] Documenting functions which are *not* in a class I agree with Wim: In .NET, functions don't exist and a method can't be defined outside of a class (or a structure). C++ allows this kind of construction. Thus your functions "which are not in a class" are regular C++ functions and they can't, by definition, be expressed by any .NET language. Indeed, these functions are compiled to native code and mixed with .NET code in the resulting assembly.=20 It can be a solution to wrap these functions into a .NET class, but only if you don't rely on some native code behavior. If you do so, pay attention to the way you manage memory (native unmanaged pointers and .NET references (managed by the GC) are not quite the same), be careful with strings too. I'm not a managed C++ expert, but this may prove not to be a trivial task.=20 PS: I don't know if you're using the .NET 1 or .NET 2 flavor of Managed C++, but be aware of the fact that even if the latter recognizes the older syntax, there are differences. And so, you may pay attention to this if grabbing samples on the net.=20 Best regards, Olivier DALET On 10/22/06, Wim Coenen <wc...@gm...> wrote:=20 Your assembly does not contain metadata for those functions because it is a "mixed assembly" with both dotnet IL instructions and native instructions, something which only occurs when compiling "c++ with managed extensions" as far as I can tell. The native part has=20 no dotnet metadata, and is thus invisible to other dotnet assemblies, like the reflector or ndoc application. I would try to move or wrap one of those global function in a static method of a __gc class called "GlobalFuncs", and document it there. Since the=20 "GlobalFuncs" class is managed, it should be visible to ndoc. 2006/10/19, Wilson Robin T <rob...@br...>: > Hi, > > Thanks for your response - sorry for the delay in replying, I've been out of > the office for quite a while. > > I've had a look with the .Net Reflector, and I can't find my standalone > functions in there at all! I'm not sure how my program is working then...I=20 > am using Visual C++ .Net and have some old-style C++ global functions which > don't seem to be appearing in the reflector, but the code is accessing them > fine! How weird! > > Dose anyone know if there's any way I can get them to appear in the=20 > reflector? Or, if there's any way that I can get them to be documented using > NDoc? > > Cheers, > > Robin > > -----Original Message----- > From: Wim Coenen [mailto: wc...@gm...] > Sent: 09 October 2006 16:26 > To: Wilson Robin T > Cc: ndo...@li... > Subject: Re: [Ndoc-users] Documenting functions which are *not* in a class > > 2006/10/6, Wilson Robin T > <rob...@br... >: > > I have lots of functions which are just in separate .cpp files with no > > membership of a class (or even a namespace - though I wouldn't mind > > making them members of a namespace if that would help). Is there any > > way to document these functions using NDoc? If I look at the XML that > > Visual Studio spits out then it does list those functions which aren't > > in a class - NDoc just doesn't seem to do anything with it.=20 > > > > I don't use visual studio or write code in c++, so I obviously cannot > reproduce this problem. However, I do know that dotNET assemblies never > contain standalone functions. Dotnet compilers for languages which do have=20 > this feature (e.g. delphi) have to put such functions in a special class. > > Now if NDOC encounters a member element which for some reason does not match > the CLR metadata of anything in the compiled assembly, then it will ignore=20 > the element. To find out if this is your problem, take a look at your > assembly (e.g. with Lutz Roeder's .NET Reflector), find out in which > namespace+class your function ended up, and then compare that with the XML=20 > element. > > That should shed some more light on the cause of your problem. > > HTH, > Wim Coenen. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ - Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo=20 http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=3Dlnk&kid=3D120709&bid=3D263057&dat=3D1= 21642 _______________________________________________=20 Ndoc-users mailing list Ndo...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ndoc-users=20 --=20 Olivier DALET --------------------------------- http://odalet.wordpress.com http://aspadvice.com/blogs/oliviers_net_blog=20 |* This e-mail, and any attachments, is confidential and for the use of the addressee only. |* If you are not the intended recipient, please telephone +44 (0) 1506 408700 =20 |* We do not accept legal responsibility for this e-mail or any viruses. =20 |* All e-mails sent and received by us are monitored. =20 |* Contracts cannot be concluded with us by e-mail. =20 |* This message has been sent from a member of the British Energy Group (the "Group"). =20 |* The parent company of the Group is British Energy Group plc, registered number 270184, and having its registered office at |* Systems House, Alba Campus, Livingston EH54 7EG =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------= ------------=20 The information transmitted is intended only for the person or =20 entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential =20 and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, =20 dissemination or other use of this information by persons or =20 entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. =20 If you received this transmission in error, please contact the =20 sender or call 800-333-5905 ext. 6259, and delete the material =20 from all computers. |
|
From: John S. <js...@ai...> - 2006-10-23 13:39:39
|
I'm not sure if I should put this here or in another thread but I'll try =
it here. When my documentation get built it includes comments from base =
classes in the .NET framework but not from my own base classes. Any =
ideas why this might be?
John
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Wilson Robin T=20
To: ndo...@li...=20
Sent: Monday, October 23, 2006 9:33 AM
Subject: Re: [Ndoc-users] Documenting functions which are *not* in a =
class
Hi all,
Thanks for your replies. Unfortunately it is not really feasible to =
move the code into a .Net class, due to reasons that Oliver mentioned =
about how memory is dealt with in managed classes.
Unless anyone else has any other ideas then presumably that means that =
I can't use XML documentation in my code. If so, that's a great shame, =
as it would make things vastly easier for me, but I'm sure I can manage =
to do it another way.
Thanks for all your help,
Robin
-------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----
From: Olivier DALET [mailto:od...@gm...]=20
Sent: 23 October 2006 08:03
To: Wim Coenen
Cc: Wilson Robin T; ndo...@li...
Subject: Re: [Ndoc-users] Documenting functions which are *not* in a =
class
I agree with Wim:
In .NET, functions don't exist and a method can't be defined outside =
of a class (or a structure). C++ allows this kind of construction.
Thus your functions "which are not in a class" are regular C++ =
functions and they can't, by definition, be expressed by any .NET =
language. Indeed, these functions are compiled to native code and mixed =
with .NET code in the resulting assembly.=20
It can be a solution to wrap these functions into a .NET class, but =
only if you don't rely on some native code behavior. If you do so, pay =
attention to the way you manage memory (native unmanaged pointers and =
.NET references (managed by the GC) are not quite the same), be careful =
with strings too. I'm not a managed C++ expert, but this may prove not =
to be a trivial task.=20
PS: I don't know if you're using the .NET 1 or .NET 2 flavor of =
Managed C++, but be aware of the fact that even if the latter recognizes =
the older syntax, there are differences. And so, you may pay attention =
to this if grabbing samples on the net.=20
Best regards,
Olivier DALET
On 10/22/06, Wim Coenen <wc...@gm...> wrote:=20
Your assembly does not contain metadata for those functions
because it is a "mixed assembly" with both dotnet IL instructions
and native instructions, something which only occurs when compiling
"c++ with managed extensions" as far as I can tell. The native part =
has=20
no dotnet metadata, and is thus invisible to other dotnet =
assemblies,
like the reflector or ndoc application.
I would try to move or wrap one of those global function in a static =
method
of a __gc class called "GlobalFuncs", and document it there. Since =
the=20
"GlobalFuncs" class is managed, it should be visible to ndoc.
2006/10/19, Wilson Robin T <rob...@br...>:
> Hi,
>
> Thanks for your response - sorry for the delay in replying, I've =
been out of
> the office for quite a while.
>
> I've had a look with the .Net Reflector, and I can't find my =
standalone
> functions in there at all! I'm not sure how my program is working =
then...I=20
> am using Visual C++ .Net and have some old-style C++ global =
functions which
> don't seem to be appearing in the reflector, but the code is =
accessing them
> fine! How weird!
>
> Dose anyone know if there's any way I can get them to appear in =
the=20
> reflector? Or, if there's any way that I can get them to be =
documented using
> NDoc?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Robin
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wim Coenen [mailto: wc...@gm...]
> Sent: 09 October 2006 16:26
> To: Wilson Robin T
> Cc: ndo...@li...
> Subject: Re: [Ndoc-users] Documenting functions which are *not* in =
a class
>
> 2006/10/6, Wilson Robin T
> <rob...@br... >:
> > I have lots of functions which are just in separate .cpp files =
with no
> > membership of a class (or even a namespace - though I wouldn't =
mind
> > making them members of a namespace if that would help). Is there =
any=20
> > way to document these functions using NDoc? If I look at the XML =
that
> > Visual Studio spits out then it does list those functions which =
aren't
> > in a class - NDoc just doesn't seem to do anything with it.=20
> >
>
> I don't use visual studio or write code in c++, so I obviously =
cannot
> reproduce this problem. However, I do know that dotNET assemblies =
never
> contain standalone functions. Dotnet compilers for languages which =
do have=20
> this feature (e.g. delphi) have to put such functions in a special =
class.
>
> Now if NDOC encounters a member element which for some reason does =
not match
> the CLR metadata of anything in the compiled assembly, then it =
will ignore=20
> the element. To find out if this is your problem, take a look at =
your
> assembly (e.g. with Lutz Roeder's .NET Reflector), find out in =
which
> namespace+class your function ended up, and then compare that with =
the XML=20
> element.
>
> That should shed some more light on the cause of your problem.
>
> HTH,
> Wim Coenen.
=
-------------------------------------------------------------------------=
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, =
security?
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your =
job easier
Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache =
Geronimo=20
=
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=3Dlnk&kid=3D120709&bid=3D263057&dat=3D=
121642
_______________________________________________=20
Ndoc-users mailing list
Ndo...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ndoc-users=20
--=20
Olivier DALET
---------------------------------
http://odalet.wordpress.com
http://aspadvice.com/blogs/oliviers_net_blog=20
|* This e-mail, and any attachments, is confidential and for the use =
of the addressee only.
|* If you are not the intended recipient, please telephone +44 (0) =
1506 408700
|* We do not accept legal responsibility for this e-mail or any =
viruses.
|* All e-mails sent and received by us are monitored.
|* Contracts cannot be concluded with us by e-mail.
|* This message has been sent from a member of the British Energy =
Group (the "Group").
|* The parent company of the Group is British Energy Group plc, =
registered number 270184, and having its registered office at
|* Systems House, Alba Campus, Livingston EH54 7EG
-------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----
=
-------------------------------------------------------------------------=
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, =
security?
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job =
easier
Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache =
Geronimo
=
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=3Dlnk&kid=3D120709&bid=3D263057&dat=3D=
121642
-------------------------------------------------------------------------=
-----
_______________________________________________
Ndoc-users mailing list
Ndo...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ndoc-users
|
|
From: Wilson R. T <rob...@br...> - 2006-10-23 13:34:02
|
Hi all, Thanks for your replies. Unfortunately it is not really feasible to move the code into a .Net class, due to reasons that Oliver mentioned about how memory is dealt with in managed classes. Unless anyone else has any other ideas then presumably that means that I can't use XML documentation in my code. If so, that's a great shame, as it would make things vastly easier for me, but I'm sure I can manage to do it another way. Thanks for all your help, Robin _____ From: Olivier DALET [mailto:od...@gm...] Sent: 23 October 2006 08:03 To: Wim Coenen Cc: Wilson Robin T; ndo...@li... Subject: Re: [Ndoc-users] Documenting functions which are *not* in a class I agree with Wim: In .NET, functions don't exist and a method can't be defined outside of a class (or a structure). C++ allows this kind of construction. Thus your functions "which are not in a class" are regular C++ functions and they can't, by definition, be expressed by any .NET language. Indeed, these functions are compiled to native code and mixed with .NET code in the resulting assembly. It can be a solution to wrap these functions into a .NET class, but only if you don't rely on some native code behavior. If you do so, pay attention to the way you manage memory (native unmanaged pointers and .NET references (managed by the GC) are not quite the same), be careful with strings too. I'm not a managed C++ expert, but this may prove not to be a trivial task. PS: I don't know if you're using the .NET 1 or .NET 2 flavor of Managed C++, but be aware of the fact that even if the latter recognizes the older syntax, there are differences. And so, you may pay attention to this if grabbing samples on the net. Best regards, Olivier DALET On 10/22/06, Wim Coenen <wc...@gm... <mailto:wc...@gm...> > wrote: Your assembly does not contain metadata for those functions because it is a "mixed assembly" with both dotnet IL instructions and native instructions, something which only occurs when compiling "c++ with managed extensions" as far as I can tell. The native part has no dotnet metadata, and is thus invisible to other dotnet assemblies, like the reflector or ndoc application. I would try to move or wrap one of those global function in a static method of a __gc class called "GlobalFuncs", and document it there. Since the "GlobalFuncs" class is managed, it should be visible to ndoc. 2006/10/19, Wilson Robin T <rob...@br... <mailto:rob...@br...> >: > Hi, > > Thanks for your response - sorry for the delay in replying, I've been out of > the office for quite a while. > > I've had a look with the .Net Reflector, and I can't find my standalone > functions in there at all! I'm not sure how my program is working then...I > am using Visual C++ .Net and have some old-style C++ global functions which > don't seem to be appearing in the reflector, but the code is accessing them > fine! How weird! > > Dose anyone know if there's any way I can get them to appear in the > reflector? Or, if there's any way that I can get them to be documented using > NDoc? > > Cheers, > > Robin > > -----Original Message----- > From: Wim Coenen [mailto: wc...@gm... <mailto:wc...@gm...> ] > Sent: 09 October 2006 16:26 > To: Wilson Robin T > Cc: ndo...@li... <mailto:ndo...@li...> > Subject: Re: [Ndoc-users] Documenting functions which are *not* in a class > > 2006/10/6, Wilson Robin T > <rob...@br... <mailto:rob...@br...> >: > > I have lots of functions which are just in separate .cpp files with no > > membership of a class (or even a namespace - though I wouldn't mind > > making them members of a namespace if that would help). Is there any > > way to document these functions using NDoc? If I look at the XML that > > Visual Studio spits out then it does list those functions which aren't > > in a class - NDoc just doesn't seem to do anything with it. > > > > I don't use visual studio or write code in c++, so I obviously cannot > reproduce this problem. However, I do know that dotNET assemblies never > contain standalone functions. Dotnet compilers for languages which do have > this feature (e.g. delphi) have to put such functions in a special class. > > Now if NDOC encounters a member element which for some reason does not match > the CLR metadata of anything in the compiled assembly, then it will ignore > the element. To find out if this is your problem, take a look at your > assembly (e.g. with Lutz Roeder's .NET Reflector), find out in which > namespace+class your function ended up, and then compare that with the XML > element. > > That should shed some more light on the cause of your problem. > > HTH, > Wim Coenen. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk <http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642> &kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Ndoc-users mailing list Ndo...@li... <mailto:Ndo...@li...> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ndoc-users <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ndoc-users> -- Olivier DALET --------------------------------- http://odalet.wordpress.com <http://odalet.wordpress.com> http://aspadvice.com/blogs/oliviers_net_blog <http://aspadvice.com/blogs/oliviers_net_blog> |* This e-mail, and any attachments, is confidential and for the use of the addressee only. |* If you are not the intended recipient, please telephone +44 (0) 1506 408700 |* We do not accept legal responsibility for this e-mail or any viruses. |* All e-mails sent and received by us are monitored. |* Contracts cannot be concluded with us by e-mail. |* This message has been sent from a member of the British Energy Group (the "Group"). |* The parent company of the Group is British Energy Group plc, registered number 270184, and having its registered office at |* Systems House, Alba Campus, Livingston EH54 7EG |
|
From: Olivier D. <od...@gm...> - 2006-10-23 07:03:19
|
I agree with Wim: In .NET, functions don't exist and a method can't be defined outside of a class (or a structure). C++ allows this kind of construction. Thus your functions "which are not in a class" are regular C++ functions and they can't, by definition, be expressed by any .NET language. Indeed, these functions are compiled to native code and mixed with .NET code in the resulting assembly. It can be a solution to wrap these functions into a .NET class, but only if you don't rely on some native code behavior. If you do so, pay attention to the way you manage memory (native unmanaged pointers and .NET references (managed by the GC) are not quite the same), be careful with strings too. I'm not a managed C++ expert, but this may prove not to be a trivial task. PS: I don't know if you're using the .NET 1 or .NET 2 flavor of Managed C++, but be aware of the fact that even if the latter recognizes the older syntax, there are differences. And so, you may pay attention to this if grabbing samples on the net. Best regards, Olivier DALET On 10/22/06, Wim Coenen <wc...@gm...> wrote: > > Your assembly does not contain metadata for those functions > because it is a "mixed assembly" with both dotnet IL instructions > and native instructions, something which only occurs when compiling > "c++ with managed extensions" as far as I can tell. The native part has > no dotnet metadata, and is thus invisible to other dotnet assemblies, > like the reflector or ndoc application. > > I would try to move or wrap one of those global function in a static > method > of a __gc class called "GlobalFuncs", and document it there. Since the > "GlobalFuncs" class is managed, it should be visible to ndoc. > > 2006/10/19, Wilson Robin T <rob...@br...>: > > Hi, > > > > Thanks for your response - sorry for the delay in replying, I've been > out of > > the office for quite a while. > > > > I've had a look with the .Net Reflector, and I can't find my standalone > > functions in there at all! I'm not sure how my program is working > then...I > > am using Visual C++ .Net and have some old-style C++ global functions > which > > don't seem to be appearing in the reflector, but the code is accessing > them > > fine! How weird! > > > > Dose anyone know if there's any way I can get them to appear in the > > reflector? Or, if there's any way that I can get them to be documented > using > > NDoc? > > > > Cheers, > > > > Robin > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Wim Coenen [mailto:wc...@gm...] > > Sent: 09 October 2006 16:26 > > To: Wilson Robin T > > Cc: ndo...@li... > > Subject: Re: [Ndoc-users] Documenting functions which are *not* in a > class > > > > 2006/10/6, Wilson Robin T > > <rob...@br...>: > > > I have lots of functions which are just in separate .cpp files with no > > > membership of a class (or even a namespace - though I wouldn't mind > > > making them members of a namespace if that would help). Is there any > > > way to document these functions using NDoc? If I look at the XML that > > > Visual Studio spits out then it does list those functions which aren't > > > in a class - NDoc just doesn't seem to do anything with it. > > > > > > > I don't use visual studio or write code in c++, so I obviously cannot > > reproduce this problem. However, I do know that dotNET assemblies never > > contain standalone functions. Dotnet compilers for languages which do > have > > this feature (e.g. delphi) have to put such functions in a special > class. > > > > Now if NDOC encounters a member element which for some reason does not > match > > the CLR metadata of anything in the compiled assembly, then it will > ignore > > the element. To find out if this is your problem, take a look at your > > assembly (e.g. with Lutz Roeder's .NET Reflector), find out in which > > namespace+class your function ended up, and then compare that with the > XML > > element. > > > > That should shed some more light on the cause of your problem. > > > > HTH, > > Wim Coenen. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? > Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job > easier > Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo > http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 > _______________________________________________ > Ndoc-users mailing list > Ndo...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ndoc-users > -- Olivier DALET --------------------------------- http://odalet.wordpress.com http://aspadvice.com/blogs/oliviers_net_blog |
|
From: Wim C. <wc...@gm...> - 2006-10-23 04:34:54
|
Your assembly does not contain metadata for those functions because it is a "mixed assembly" with both dotnet IL instructions and native instructions, something which only occurs when compiling "c++ with managed extensions" as far as I can tell. The native part has no dotnet metadata, and is thus invisible to other dotnet assemblies, like the reflector or ndoc application. I would try to move or wrap one of those global function in a static method of a __gc class called "GlobalFuncs", and document it there. Since the "GlobalFuncs" class is managed, it should be visible to ndoc. 2006/10/19, Wilson Robin T <rob...@br...>: > Hi, > > Thanks for your response - sorry for the delay in replying, I've been out of > the office for quite a while. > > I've had a look with the .Net Reflector, and I can't find my standalone > functions in there at all! I'm not sure how my program is working then...I > am using Visual C++ .Net and have some old-style C++ global functions which > don't seem to be appearing in the reflector, but the code is accessing them > fine! How weird! > > Dose anyone know if there's any way I can get them to appear in the > reflector? Or, if there's any way that I can get them to be documented using > NDoc? > > Cheers, > > Robin > > -----Original Message----- > From: Wim Coenen [mailto:wc...@gm...] > Sent: 09 October 2006 16:26 > To: Wilson Robin T > Cc: ndo...@li... > Subject: Re: [Ndoc-users] Documenting functions which are *not* in a class > > 2006/10/6, Wilson Robin T > <rob...@br...>: > > I have lots of functions which are just in separate .cpp files with no > > membership of a class (or even a namespace - though I wouldn't mind > > making them members of a namespace if that would help). Is there any > > way to document these functions using NDoc? If I look at the XML that > > Visual Studio spits out then it does list those functions which aren't > > in a class - NDoc just doesn't seem to do anything with it. > > > > I don't use visual studio or write code in c++, so I obviously cannot > reproduce this problem. However, I do know that dotNET assemblies never > contain standalone functions. Dotnet compilers for languages which do have > this feature (e.g. delphi) have to put such functions in a special class. > > Now if NDOC encounters a member element which for some reason does not match > the CLR metadata of anything in the compiled assembly, then it will ignore > the element. To find out if this is your problem, take a look at your > assembly (e.g. with Lutz Roeder's .NET Reflector), find out in which > namespace+class your function ended up, and then compare that with the XML > element. > > That should shed some more light on the cause of your problem. > > HTH, > Wim Coenen. |
|
From: Wilson R. T <rob...@br...> - 2006-10-19 13:43:48
|
Hi, Thanks for your response - sorry for the delay in replying, I've been out of the office for quite a while. I've had a look with the .Net Reflector, and I can't find my standalone functions in there at all! I'm not sure how my program is working then...I am using Visual C++ .Net and have some old-style C++ global functions which don't seem to be appearing in the reflector, but the code is accessing them fine! How weird! Dose anyone know if there's any way I can get them to appear in the reflector? Or, if there's any way that I can get them to be documented using NDoc? Cheers, Robin -----Original Message----- From: Wim Coenen [mailto:wc...@gm...] Sent: 09 October 2006 16:26 To: Wilson Robin T Cc: ndo...@li... Subject: Re: [Ndoc-users] Documenting functions which are *not* in a class 2006/10/6, Wilson Robin T <rob...@br...>: > I have lots of functions which are just in separate .cpp files with no > membership of a class (or even a namespace - though I wouldn't mind > making them members of a namespace if that would help). Is there any > way to document these functions using NDoc? If I look at the XML that > Visual Studio spits out then it does list those functions which aren't > in a class - NDoc just doesn't seem to do anything with it. > I don't use visual studio or write code in c++, so I obviously cannot reproduce this problem. However, I do know that dotNET assemblies never contain standalone functions. Dotnet compilers for languages which do have this feature (e.g. delphi) have to put such functions in a special class. Now if NDOC encounters a member element which for some reason does not match the CLR metadata of anything in the compiled assembly, then it will ignore the element. To find out if this is your problem, take a look at your assembly (e.g. with Lutz Roeder's .NET Reflector), find out in which namespace+class your function ended up, and then compare that with the XML element. That should shed some more light on the cause of your problem. HTH, Wim Coenen. |* This e-mail, and any attachments, is confidential and for the use of the addressee only. |* If you are not the intended recipient, please telephone +44 (0) 1506 408700 |* We do not accept legal responsibility for this e-mail or any viruses. |* All e-mails sent and received by us are monitored. |* Contracts cannot be concluded with us by e-mail. |* This message has been sent from a member of the British Energy Group (the "Group"). |* The parent company of the Group is British Energy Group plc, registered number 270184, and having its registered office at |* Systems House, Alba Campus, Livingston EH54 7EG |
|
From: Wim C. <wc...@gm...> - 2006-10-09 15:25:48
|
2006/10/6, Wilson Robin T <rob...@br...>: > I have lots of functions which are just in separate .cpp files with no > membership of a class (or even a namespace - though I wouldn't mind making > them members of a namespace if that would help). Is there any way to > document these functions using NDoc? If I look at the XML that Visual Studio > spits out then it does list those functions which aren't in a class - NDoc > just doesn't seem to do anything with it. > I don't use visual studio or write code in c++, so I obviously cannot reproduce this problem. However, I do know that dotNET assemblies never contain standalone functions. Dotnet compilers for languages which do have this feature (e.g. delphi) have to put such functions in a special class. Now if NDOC encounters a member element which for some reason does not match the CLR metadata of anything in the compiled assembly, then it will ignore the element. To find out if this is your problem, take a look at your assembly (e.g. with Lutz Roeder's .NET Reflector), find out in which namespace+class your function ended up, and then compare that with the XML element. That should shed some more light on the cause of your problem. HTH, Wim Coenen. |
|
From: Wilson R. T <rob...@br...> - 2006-10-06 07:43:23
|
Hi all, I've recently downloaded NDoc and tried to start documenting my project using it. However, I've found that it seems to only document functions which are members of a class. I have lots of functions which are just in separate .cpp files with no membership of a class (or even a namespace - though I wouldn't mind making them members of a namespace if that would help). Is there any way to document these functions using NDoc? If I look at the XML that Visual Studio spits out then it does list those functions which aren't in a class - NDoc just doesn't seem to do anything with it. Any ideas anyone? Cheers, Robin |* This e-mail, and any attachments, is confidential and for the use of the addressee only. |* If you are not the intended recipient, please telephone +44 (0) 1506 408700 |* We do not accept legal responsibility for this e-mail or any viruses. |* All e-mails sent and received by us are monitored. |* Contracts cannot be concluded with us by e-mail. |* This message has been sent from a member of the British Energy Group (the "Group"). |* The parent company of the Group is British Energy Group plc, registered number 270184, and having its registered office at |* Systems House, Alba Campus, Livingston EH54 7EG |
33 messages has been excluded from this view by a project administrator.