From: "trans.  (T. Onoma)" <transami@...>
Date: 2004-10-16T09:54:23+09:00
Subject: Re: documentation as source

On Friday 15 October 2004 06:46 pm, Nathaniel Talbott wrote:
| On Oct 15, 2004, at 11:19, gabriele renzi wrote:
| > trans. (T. Onoma) ha scritto:
| >> I have three issues with using comments in this way.
| >>   1. Comments take on meaning. Comments with syntax errors? Ick.
| >
| > don't you expect to have correct samples and comments?
|
| This is the key thing for me. Anything that helps us (automatically)
| keep code and documentation in sync is a good thing. Also, anything
| that lets us leverage code to automatically create documentation is a
| good thing, too (this is why RDoc is so cool).
|
| >>   3. SOC is important too.
| >
| > Separation Of Concerns? Samples Only Code? Save Our Code?
| > Sorry, but I'm dumb and dunno what you mean :)
|
| Yah, I haven't figured this out, either. Sign Our Camel?

:) Lol. Funny guesses. 

Sorry,

  SOC == Separation Of Concern

But you answered my `concern` (about that) already ;)

T.