[mercury-users] [feature request] (slightly) richer XML doc output

[Peter Ross]

On 4/19/07, doug.auclair at logicaltypes.com <doug.auclair at logicaltypes.com> wrote:
> Dear Peter, you wrote in reply to my XML "which modules included"
> query:
>
> >import_module and use_module, it doesn't do the include_modules
>
> Hm, okay.  So, as some libraries are built using the include_module
> directive, can the XML documentation system be enhanced to include
> modules included by the include_module directive?
>
Yes but not in the near term, as I need to wait for a major change
which zoltan is doing.
You can avoid the problem for a moment by doing a import_module for
each include_module.

> Or, is this a Mercury standards thing: should libraries /never/
> be constructed with the include_module directive and be constructed
> only in some other way?  If so, what is the preferred way to
> construct libraries?  If not, then can those modules be included
> into the XML document produced?  If not, how can I used this
> facility of mmc to build documentation for libraries?
>
For me using sub-modules is the standard way to build a library.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
mercury-users mailing list
Post messages to:       mercury-users at csse.unimelb.edu.au
Administrative Queries: owner-mercury-users at csse.unimelb.edu.au
Subscriptions:          mercury-users-request at csse.unimelb.edu.au
--------------------------------------------------------------------------