Re: [Swig-user] SWIG documentation - compilers, modules and other mysteries.

[Smith J. (E. - U. - U. Group) <jac...@un...>]

-- SNIP --  
> SWIG is an open source project and all the contributions, 
> including the documentation have been given by volunteers. 
> Although the nearly 700 pages of documentation is of a much 
> higher volume and quality compared to most open source 
> projects, it is far from being perfect and is lacking 
> severely in some areas. Many of your comments in previous 
> threads have been valid, but some indicate that you simply 
> have not hd the patience to read the documentation that is 
> there. I havn't had time to reply to all your comments, but 
> have attempted to improve the docs on modules with your 
> comments in mind. You can view the recent commits 
> http://swig.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/swig/trunk/Doc/Manual/?view=log
> 
> and can even view the latest version online from 
> http://swig.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/swig/trunk/Doc/Manual/
> 
> starting here:
> http://swig.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/swig/trunk/Doc/Manual/C
> ontents.html
> 

I have been reading the documentation which is found here:
http://www.swig.org/Doc1.3/  which is where the SWIG front page
http://www.swig.org/doc.html, eventually leads to.

The link you have provided (to SWIG documentation within a subversion
repository) appears to contain significantly different documentation.
So different that sections present in the former version are either
renamed, renumbered or entirely missing from the latter.

I presume that the subversion version of the documentation is the most
up to date, and so will refer to that in the future.

Perhaps a link from the main SWIG page to the subversion version of the
SWIG documentation would help prevent further confusion.


> Given you are going through the docs with a fine tooth comb, 

Only because I am trying to understand how to use SWIG.

> please submit a patch onto SourceForge with any corrections 
> you feel are necessary. Contributions from SWIG users such as 
> yourself are the only way it is going to get better.
>
 
Once I am able to understand SWIG well enough to contribute sensible
corrections I will do so.