Just a couple of suggestions. Make it a Makefile target and use a better theme like sphinxdoc :) --dnarvaez
Just a couple of suggestions. Make it a Makefile target and use a better theme like sphinxdoc :) --dnarvaez
+
+
== Tool to be used ==
+
+
* Sphinx
+
* epydoc
+
* Doxigen
+
* <add your tool here>
+
+
+
Sugarlabs already has a sphinx instance, although it is a bit out of date: http://doc.sugarlabs.org/sphinx/
+
+
It also has a epydoc instance: http://doc.sugarlabs.org/epydocs/ (a.k.a api.sugarlabs.org)
+
+
I previously kept a Doxygen parsing of the Sugar toolkit, largely because I know how to make nice dependancy graphs with Doxygen. This currently is not hosted anywhere.
+
+
In general each documentation tool I have used has a slightly different style for comments to state things like '@param input_item Describes this input" and "@returns A XYZ object if successful; null on failure". So you should decide on the tool to use that can do everything you want before you formally go annotating the code base.
+
+
== Workaround ==
+
+
* Taken from the sugar-devel mailing list
+
+
<pre>
+
My quick and dirty solution for browsable docs are to just hop into the terminal on an XO and type
+
pydoc -p 8080 and then point Browse to localhost:8080. Now that we have moved to webkit I'm really
+
tempted to wrap this up as a little webkit activity to get to the dev docs with no geeking around ;)