[Pasdoc-main] [RFC] Parsing of the implementation section

[Mark de W. <ko...@xs...>]

I just started to implant the parsing of the implementation section of
an unit and it seems to work pretty well.

Classes in the implementations are not parsed and generate an error.
Definitions and procedures inside a procedure are ignored.
If people really want this, then let me know.

The following questions have occurred:

1. What should we do with comment for a (class) method which already has
comment, ignore or add another paragraph in the document if so before or
after the comment in an external document? I'd perfer to drop the
comment.

2. For forward declared procedures in the implementation I prefer to get
the comment from the forward declaration. If nothing declared then 
look at the real procedure for comment. In both cases also use the 
external documentation. For procedures only implanted without a forward
declaration the comment at the implementation is used.

3. I think it would be wise to show in the output somehow what is defined
in the implementation and what not. For the HTML output I would suggest
another header row in the output with the same links but to the
implementation section. When using the sidebar not showing these items.

4. I'm not familair with the Latex output so I've no suggestions for that
part.

5. To separate between items defined in the interface and the implementation, 
I would suggest we add a boolean DefinedInImplementation in TBaseItem.

6. If somebody has other ideas, please let me know.


Regards,

Mark de Wever