\ProvidesFile{makedoc.tex}[2011/01/25 documenting makedoc.sty]
\RequirePackage{makedoc}
\documentclass{article}
\input{makedoc.cfg}
\usepackage{color} %% 2011/01/25
\sfcode`/=1001 %% TODO makedoc.cfg!? 2010/03/21 niceverb!? 2011/01/25
\makeatletter %% TEST for hyperref compatibility 2010/03/11
% \def\@testdef #1#2#3{%
% \def\reserved@a{#3}%
% \expandafter \ifx \csname #1@#2\endcsname
% \reserved@a \else \@tempswatrue \fi
% \if@tempswa
% \typeout{^^J*** Type `r' to get around
% \string\label\space issues! ***^^J}
% \errorcontextlines=0
% \show\reserved@a
% \expandafter \show \csname #1@#2\endcsname
% \fi
% }
% \makeatother
\begin{document}
\title{'makedoc'---Preprocessing documentation by \TeX\thanks{%
This document describes %% 2011/01/25
version~\textcolor{blue}{\UseVersionOf{makedoc.sty}}
of 'makedoc.sty' as of \UseDateOf{makedoc.sty}.}}
\maketitle
\begin{abstract}\noindent
'makedoc' provides commands for generating \LaTeX\ input from a
package file in order to typeset the latter's documentation
(somewhat similar and opposite to 'docstrip')---with
v0.3 \emph{a single one usually suffices}.
Certain comment marks are removed, listing commands are inserted,
and some (configurable) typographical `txt'$\to$\TeX\ corrections
are applied.---This
continues the policy of 'niceverb' to minimize documentation markup in
package files. 'makedoc' extends and exemplifies the parsing package
'fifinddo'. After an edit (and test) of your package, you get the new
documentation in one run (or the usual number of runs) of the
documentation driver file.---The present approach is meant to be an
\emph{alternative} to the standard 'doc' package and its `\DocInput'.
It provides \emph{less} than 'doc' does, rather deliberately. It may
be helpful at least for the development of small packages, or at least
at early stages.
\end{abstract}
\tableofcontents
\section{Introduction}
\emph{The abstract will not be repeated in this section.} Let me add
instead that I was in dire need of such a package, I got stuck with my
packages because I lost orientation in them, and I was unhappy with
the forms of documentations of my other packages, and documenting them
with the standard \LaTeX\ 'doc' system was not attractive for me
(neither considered helpful). %% clarified 2010/03/13
I also worked on \emph{Windows} until September 2008, and I
find a system like the present one still more attractive then using
(learning!\@) other filtering utilities (see below on 'awk'). And I
may work on \emph{Windows} once again and don't want to depend on
installing some $\dots$ there---\emph{I really would like to have
powerful tools for everything depending on nothing but \TeX\slash
\LaTeX!}
\section{Prior work and what is new}
It is, of course, not a new idea to get around comment marks `%' to
typeset the documentation. 'doc''s `\DocInput' does this by making `%'
an ``ignored" character. This way you cannot use `%' for commenting
comments (so 'doc' offers a ``new comment mark"
`^'`^'`A'). %% TODO `^^A' suddenly failed 2010/03/15 -- "ligature"!?
You also cannot use `%' for commenting out code (that you are
pondering---or using for debugging---only). %% clarified 2010/03/13
Moreover, 'doc' requires enclosing package code explicitly by
environment commands (behind comment marks). Stephan I. B\"ottcher
with his '\href{http://ctan.org/pkg/lineno}{lineno.sty}'
and Grzegorz Murzynowski in \ctanpkgref{gmdoc}
aimed at doing away with this requirement.
'lineno.sty' contains 'awk' scripts
to remove starting comment marks and to insert listing commands.
A file 'lineno.tex' is generated that typesets the documentation.
By the way, 'lineno.sty' is full of discussions, but it is not
'docstrip'ped---the maintainers never have received a complaint
that inputting 'lineno.sty' were too slow.
'gmdoc' seems to get around comment marks and insert listing commands
\emph{while typesetting} by a refined version of `\DocInput',
through some careful detecting and analysing comment marks,
the approach resembles detection of lists in 'wiki.sty'.\footnote{See
'gmdoc.pdf' on &\DocInput. You can learn a lot from this 220 pages
document! I also find
\ctanpkgref{pauldoc} and \ctanpkgref{xdoc} inspiring.}
And this is a matter of principles---comparing the approaches of
\emph{preprocessing} ('lineno.sty') and \emph{``smart typesetting"}
('gmdoc', 'wiki'). Sometimes preprocessing seems to be simpler,
sometimes detecting while typesetting.
(Another example is the preprocessor
\ctanpkgref{easylatex}
of which 'wiki.sty' is a much reduced ``while typesetting" variant.)
``While typesetting" may be easier when single characters or
sequences of two or three encode markup
information---but such detection can badly interfere with other
packages etc. ``Preprocessing" may be easier when entire ``strings"
of characters decide, which may be anywhere in a file line.
'makedoc' chooses \emph{preprocessing}, as 'lineno.sty', but by
\emph{\TeX}. There is a general discussion of this choice in the
documentation of 'fifinddo'. Preprocessing here can be done in the
same \LaTeX\ run as typesetting, though you can avoid
incompatabilities with packages needed for typesetting
(by inputting them only \emph{after} preprocessing).
'lineno.sty' exemplifies why preprocessing with \emph{\TeX} may be
preferable to preprocessing with other utilities:
When I took over maintenance of 'lineno.sty',
I needed hard work to get the 'awk' script running.
The \emph{Munich} 'awk' seemed \emph{not} to behave as the \emph{Kiel}
'awk' (I chose a Munich 'nawk' and reworked the script a little).
\TeX\ seems to have better fixed functionality than other utilities!
A different alternative to \LaTeX's 'doc' system is
Paul Isambert's '\href{http://ctan.org/pkg/codedoc}{CodeDoc}'
where the code environments extract package code in typesetting the
documentation. %% added 2010/03/10
\section{Styles supported (parsers provided)}\label{sec:styles}
% \section{Styles of commenting '.sty's}
We find different styles of documenting \LaTeX\ packages.
As the main aspects I consider
(i)~\emph{telling code from comments}
and (ii)~\emph{markup in comments}.
(You may find more details on the next matters in the
``implementation" section.)
\subsection{Telling code from comments}
\emph{Comment marks} (usually \lq`%'\rq\ in the case of \TeX)
probably were named so to mark \emph{``comments"} as opposed
to code $\dots$ great, but actually, in ``daily practice,"
they are so handy---and used---for ``commenting out" \emph{code},
i.e., \emph{managing code versions} in a simple way:
one does not actually want to \emph{delete} code,
one might want to use it another time, maybe for debugging
$\dots$ or to remind of earlier attempts that should not be tried
again $\dots$
This is a problem for \emph{high-quality typesetting} of
documentation. \emph{Code} should be typeset about as you see it on
the \emph{screen}---\emph{monospaced}, this allows structuring by
indenting, it is common practice to use a typewriter typeface for
this. Real \emph{comments} should be typeset in \emph{high quality} as
usual with \LaTeX. Little dilemmas therefore occur with \emph{``hidden
code"} (``commented-out"). A comment mark starts the line, but
obviously it is not really a comment and rather should be typeset
like code (and otherwise they may break). %% 2010/03/22
Another problem are comments at the \emph{end} of a
\emph{code} line. Sometimes they are ``real comments" ('gmdoc'
supports this style). But sometimes
this is only another version of ``version management," code
``commented-out."
I like the style of writing packages described before and use it all
the time. I mark ``real comments" with \emph{two} adjacent comment
marks and an ensuing space to distinguish them clearly from code
commented out.
%% Adapted to v0.4 2010/03/29:
\emph{This style is presently the one supported by \textup{'makedoc'}
as default.}
This way only a line starting with
|%% | is considered a ``real" comment line. The first three
characters are removed, and the rest is typeset in high quality.
Any other lines are typeset verbatim. The 'makedoc' \emph{parser}
doing this has an ``identifier" |PPScomment| (``percent, percent,
space"). Another identifier |comment| is a placeholder for
the comment parser to be used, by default it is an alias for
`PPScomment'. Lines just containing |%%| (without the space) may be
used to suppress empty code lines preceding section titles and for
keeping some visual, relieving space between code and comment lines.
The style I described previously may be considered ``unprofessional."
The many \LaTeX\ packages documented using the 'doc'\slash'.dtx'
system don't use comment marks for \emph{``commenting-out"}.
Or one may mark code commented out by putting no space between the
percent mark and the code.
With v0.4 of 'makedoc', this style is supported as |PScomment|.
You can directly call this as as described below,
or you can switch to it by
\[`\CopyFDconditionFromTo{PScomment}{comment}'\]
\subsection{Markup in comments}
Packages using the 'doc'\slash '.dtx' system as well as alternative
highly developed systems mentioned above use (enhanced) usual
\emph{\LaTeX} syntax for markup of comments. Other packages just use
an \emph{ASCII} style \emph{without} any markup. My idea was to
support the latter style by some `txt'$\to$\LaTeX\ functionality.
'makedoc' does this using a file 'mdoccorr.cfg' which is very small
right now.
I also thought of introducing another sort of ``decent" markup not
needing much more space than the ``ASCII kernel" of the comments.
This is to some extent implemented in 'niceverb.sty'. I thought of the
syntax of editing \textit{Wikipedia} pages; this is partially
implemented in 'wiki.sty' which unfortunately is not yet compatible
with 'niceverb'.
But 'makedoc' implements one \textit{Wikipedia} feature in a different
way than 'wiki.sty' (cf.~'wikicheat.pdf') that looks about as follows:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\endcell\endcell`%% == Section =='\\
\endcell\endcell`%% === Subsection ==='\\
\endcell\endcell`%% ==== Subsubsection ===='
\end{eqnarray*}
i.e., you type `== ==' in place of `\section{}' etc.
The parser must replace `=======' before `======' and
the latter before `===='. In fact, 'makedoc' provides three
parsers for these situations:
\begin{description}
\cmdboxitem|\SectionLevelThreeParseInput| is the most general parser
offered. If it does not find two strings \lq`===='\rq\ enclosing
\emph{something}, it passes to
\cmdboxitem|\SectionLevelTwoParseInput| which unless finding
two strings `===' enclosing something passes to
\cmdboxitem|\SectionLevelOneParseInput| $\dots$ passes to the comment
detector |comment|.
\end{description}
\section{Requirements}
'makedoc' requires \LaTeXe\ (supporting star forms of `\newcommand'
etc.)\ as \TeX-format, the package 'fifinddo.sty' from the same
directory (on CTAN etc.)\ as where 'makedoc.sty' is, and the
\LaTeX-package 'moreverb' by Robin Fairbairns (after others)---it
should be installed anyway, or you can get its latest version
(v2.3, 2008/06/03?) from CTAN.
'makedoc''s `.txt'$\to$\TeX\ functionality moreover needs a file
'mdoccorr.cfg' that should have come along with 'makedoc.sty' and
'fifinddo.sty'. You may need to have a modified copy of it in the
directory of your main `.tex' file `.tex' fitting special
needs of your project.
\section{Using 'makedoc' the simplest way}
In the most simple case, you are preparing documentation for a package
file `.sty' only, and you prepare a file `.tex'
containing
\[`\title{\textsf{}---a \LaTeX\ Package for }'\]
and `\maketitle' etc.\ about your package.\footnote{With 'niceverb'
and &\title\ after &\begin{document}, you may replace
\lq&\textsf{}\rq\ by \lq&'&'\rq.}
The documentation will be produced by running `.tex' with
\LaTeX\ (e.g., \texttt{latex .tex}).
First, `.tex' must have |\usepackage{makedoc}| in its preamble.
There are no package options.
Second, to typeset the commented implementation from `.sty',
include in .tex's `document' environment a line
\[|\MakeInputJobDoc{}{\SectionLevelThreeParseInput}|\]
refers to a non-negative integer as follows:
We think the most simple and useful way of typesetting the first lines
of a package file including license and copyrights is ``depicting them
as image," i.e., \textit{verbatim}. We could try to determine the
number of these lines by parsing, but we won't do so soon. Please just
count them and enter the number as ---and change it
until you can accept the outcome.
\section{Steps of advanced usage}
\subsection{Different main parsers (second mandatory argument)}
`\MakeInputJobDoc''s mandatory syntax actually is
\[|\MakeInputJobDoc{}{}|\]
refers to the parsing macro that is applied to each
input line whose number is greater than .
Examples for are named in section~\ref{sec:styles} above.
%% TODO above/below macro 2010/03/15
`\SectionLevelThreeParseInput' is just the most general one.
For \emph{efficiency} (!? or also to avoid problems?) you may
replace `Three' by `Two' or by `One', if the `====' or the `==='
feature is not used in `.sty'. If the ``\textit{Wikipedia}
sectioning" feature is not used at all, use
\[|\MakeInputJobDoc{}{\ProcessInputWith{comment}}|\]
---provided you want to adopt the \lq`%% '\rq\ style of marking
comments, cf.~section~\ref{sec:styles}. For the \lq`% '\rq style
instead, use
\[|\MakeInputJobDoc{}{\ProcessInputWith{PScomment}}|\]
\subsection{Different extensions (optional arguments)}
If your package to be documented is a \emph{class} `.cls',
a local configuration file `.cfg' or something
else---., e.g., =`cls' or =`cfg',
use
\[|\MakeInputJobDoc[]{}{}|\]
Moreover, `\MakeInputJobDoc' writes an intermediate file
`.doc' and then `\input's it. If you do not like `doc'
as extension for the written file name (maybe you use
`.doc' for something different already), preferring extension
, use
\[|\MakeInputJobDoc[][]{}{}|\]
Yes, you must state then as well, I can't help $\dots$
If even is wrong in your view, see next step $\dots$
\subsection{Commands modifying &\MakeInputJobDoc's behaviour}
\label{sec:modimake}
Already may not be what you want. E.g., you may want
to collect documentations of some other files , ,
$\dots$ in a single . Then precede `\MakeInputJobDoc'
with
\[`\renewcommand*{\mdJobName}{}'\]
etc.\ (please reason yourself about additional requirements \dots)
As a matter of fact, `\MakeInputJobDoc' reads
\[`\mdJobName.' \mbox{\quad and writes\quad}
`\mdJobName.'\]
Stated another way, above referred to |\mdJobName|.
`\MakeInputJobInput' moreover (by default) produces one dot
per input line processed on screen to show progress.
The reason is that `makedoc' issues the command
|\ProcessLineMessage{\message{.}}|.
Already this trivial thing seems to slow down processing considerably
(nowadays). `\MakeInputJobInput' will run faster if preceded by
\[|\ProcessLineMessage{}|\]
which will suppress any message about processing.
However, the message may be helpful in trouble-shooting.
\subsection{Separating preprocessing from typesetting}
%% extended 2010/03/16
To some surprise, I observe that `\MakeInputJobDoc' \emph{works.}
This is quite a new discovery of mine (2010/03/13);
before I thought that, for safety, preprocessing should happen
inside a local group \emph{preceding} `\documentclass'.
|\MakeJobDoc| works like `\MakeInputJobDoc' described above,
yet it just \emph{preprocesses} the package to be documented,
waiting for an
\[`\input{.}'\]
in the `document' environment to \emph{typeset} the documentation.
So 'makedoc.tex' once had in its preamble
% \[`{\RequirePackage{makedoc} \MakeJobDoc{}{}}'\]
% at the top of `.tex' and `\input{.}' later.
\begin{eqnarray*}\endcell\endcell
`{\RequirePackage{makedoc}'\cr \endcell\endcell
` \ProcessLineMessage{}'\cr \endcell\endcell
` \MakeJobDoc{22}{\ProcessInputWith{comment}}}'\cr
\endcell\endcell
`\documentclass{article}'
\end{eqnarray*}
I did experience some truth in my earlier safety policy:
With 'niceverb' ``running," `\MakeJobDoc' cannot (easily) be used
in the `document' environment. `\MakeInputJobDoc' in fact does some
'niceverb' switching (provided 'niceverb' has been loaded)
when making use of `\MakeJobDoc'.
%% <- verbose to improve line breaks 2010/03/16
Thinking of this ``safety" approach, especially grouping (`{\code}'),
I had not much cared for compatibility with other packages
in choosing 'makedoc' macro names.
\subsection{Other 'makedoc' (and 'fifindo') script commands}
The next script commands may be considered of a lower level than
`\MakeJobDoc' and `\MakeInputJobDoc', they underlie the latter
commands. We also list commands from 'fifinddo.sty' that may be useful
or, indeed, are needed for preparing package documentations.
This may result in ideas on how do use the script commands for
different purposes than for preparing package documentations---e.g.,
apply `txt'$\to$\TeX\ preprocessing to arbitrary text files.
\subsubsection{Choosing parameter values for next preprocessing run}
This actually continues section~\ref{sec:modimake}.
\begin{description}
\cmdboxitem|\ResultFile{