[wp-hackers] Proposal for a function commenting convention

Jacob wordpress at santosj.name
Wed Oct 17 03:55:09 GMT 2007

@Andy: I was referring to actions I would be taking and patches I'll be 
submitting. If anyone wants to join in and do the same for files, then 
do please tell me and I won't work on those. Also, it wouldn't do much 
good to have people going off in different directions. Conformity in any 
case is a good thing. I reference a ticket in my previous post, which 
I'm using as an example. You can take a look at it and comment on it. 
The more feedback, the better the end result.

That and the whole @package WordPress solves the whole issue. They can 
just use @package WordPressMu, for their functions. There is no need to 
have additional information with @since and @deprecated. I've been 
adding "@package WordPress" to all functions that I've documented so far.

Jacob Santos

Peter Westwood wrote:
> Hash: SHA1
> Marcos Sader | marcosmedia wrote:
>> I still think that there should be a "WP" indicator in case of functions
>> shared between the regular and multiuser version.
>> So WP will get,
>> /**
>> * @since WP 1.5
>> * @deprecated WP 2.1
>> */
>> and WPmu,
>> /**
>> * @since WPmu 1.5
>> * @deprecated WPmu 2.1
>> */
> If you want PHPDoc over in wpmu land then you need to convince the
> people there that it is worth adding and the the @since and @depreceated
> tags can be correctly maintained there.
> WP != WPmu and we don't need WPmu docs in our code.
> westi
> - --
> Peter Westwood
> http://blog.ftwr.co.uk
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
> iD8DBQFHFR30VPRdzag0AcURAtjtAKDRyKv8ZxLeI35Dwfvn+Ktz+IAKJwCg0bzk
> g2JdEhmxaOG2a5SsLpvGhGE=
> =3hi9
> _______________________________________________
> wp-hackers mailing list
> wp-hackers at lists.automattic.com
> http://lists.automattic.com/mailman/listinfo/wp-hackers

More information about the wp-hackers mailing list