Template talk:Nasal doc
Some suggestions and ideas
- There should probably be descriptions to the examples.
- It might be a good way to standardize if there is a requirement that a parameter is of a certain type (though formally Nasal is not really typed, or was it?).
Typography as an indicator
I have one idea about the typographic style of the parameters, in essence following the scheme used in the template documentation, but have not really figured out if it should be done without the syntax highlighting or if it should be done in another way.
I guess a lot could be automated using sub templates, even to the point that syntax, parameter names (including indication of mandatory/optional) and their use would just be a list in the form <param>|<(o|m)>|<description>.
I wonder though how many functions have parameters that sometimes are optional, but are mandatory if some other parameter is used. That would mess up such a scheme, but not the current one (using brackets).
—Johan G (Talk | contribs) 21:33, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
simgear modules and cppbind
It may make sense to adapt the template to introduce a namespace argument, referring to [1] and Nasal/CppBind: