[WIP] Documentation#29
Conversation
kvark
left a comment
kvark
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Let's add #![warn(missing_docs)] and document the missing fields
| } | ||
|
|
||
| /// The light source that illuminates all objects equally from a given direction, | ||
| /// like an area light of infinite size and infinite distance from the scene; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think "infinite size" needs to be here
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So, only "The light source that illuminates all objects equally from a given direction"?
|
The in-documentation examples is something I'm not 100% sure about, since even if you make them CI-tested, they still add up the maintenance cost, especially now that the library is still evolving rapidly. |
src/lib.rs
Outdated
| #![warn(missing_docs)] | ||
| //! # Motivation and Goals | ||
| //! | ||
| //! 1. Ergonomics is first priority. Being able to prototype quickly and code |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not keen on the idea of duplicating this both here and in the Readme...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oh, yeah, I forgot to say that. I need help to write good module-level documentation :D
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think not having any is somewhat better than duplication, so it's fine to remove that.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
But we have #![warn(missing_docs)]. Should I remove that? (I've documented everything)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No, just have a one-liner for the module documentation
|
See, now it's trying to test your in-doc tests. At this point, we need to either implement OsMesa support for headless rendering, or not have those in-doc examples at all. |
* Add basic documentation * Provide top-level documentation for every struct * Document every public entity * Replace crate-level documentation * Remove in-doc example
2 participants
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.