[MUD-Dev] Re: My vision for DevMUD

Ben Greear greear at cyberhighway.net
Tue Nov 3 23:07:33 New Zealand Daylight Time 1998

The good folks at Gimp (Or maybe it was Gnome) came up with a
good tool that works similar to javadoc, except on c++ code.

I can't remember the name right now, but I like it's results.
I use it at work, so will try to remember to look up it's name
and let you all know.  Though I probably won't be contributing
much to DevMUD, I'll put my meagre vote in for plain-text docs.

Write tools to generate the html/postscript or whatever from that
plain text if need be.

On Tue, 3 Nov 1998, Chris Gray wrote:

> [Niklas Elmqvist:]
>  >Experimental MUD features? Good enough, but would it fuddle things if we
>  >added "next-generation MUD server"? At least as a secondary goal?
> Not unless you define what is meant by "next-generation MUD server". As
> it is, it means nothing to me. What "generation" are we at now, and
> what would distinguish DevMUD from it?
>  >*Very* important, IMHO. This ties in nicely with the "educational" goal.
>  >We probably need a standard document format which can be easily converted
>  >to HTML, PostScript, info, etc... I'm far from familiar with this area but
>  >maybe a SGML DTD could be used? And how about source code documentation?
> I'm a strong believer in source code documentation, myself. That way, it
> doesn't get lost. Having to bring up some tool or other just to read
> documentation either slows me down (likely I'd have to find the tool on
> the net and install it first!), or make me not bother reading the docs
> at all. I know I'm impossibly old-fashioned, but give me straight
> text anyday!
> --
> Don't design inefficiency in - it'll happen in the implementation. - me
> Chris Gray     cg at ami-cg.GraySage.Edmonton.AB.CA
> -- 
> MUD-Dev: Advancing an unrealised future.

Ben Greear (greear at cyberhighway.net)  http://www.primenet.com/~greear 
Author of ScryMUD:  mud.primenet.com 4444

More information about the MUD-Dev mailing list