Re: javadoc for RPGLE

" Jon evidently has at least some familiarity with one of them."

I am familiar with Paul's tool and have looked at others previously.

The major difference with Paul's is that the heart of the tool is a scan and store engine that places all the information in a database. The presentation layers he provides (one in CGIDEV2 and one in PHP) are simply demonstrations of what can be done to customize the output. i.e. there is no fixed output (other than the database) you can do what you want. This means that if all you want to do is run queries over the data with SQL you can do so at any time.

It occurs to me as I write this, that one could simply generate "Javascript" ( or "C++" or whatever ) from Paul's database and then run whatever documentation tool-du-jour you happen to prefer from the available OS offerings.

Just a thought.


Jon Paris

www.partner400.com
www.SystemiDeveloper.com

On Aug 29, 2017, at 2:29 PM, John Yeung <gallium.arsenide@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 1:42 PM, Charles Wilt <charles.wilt@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

"missing" as in any other options I didn't already having listed.

Actually, I think Jon was talking about what was missing from the
options already listed. The relevant quotes from the thread:

Charles:

It seems Mihael's newer ILEDOCS is the only one currently
maintained, but from what I can tell, it doesn't yet have the
RPGLE parsers included.

John:

Were the old RPG ones (and Mihael's newer one) too limited
in features? You mentioned that RPGLE parsing was missing.
Would any of them nevertheless still work better than a
comment-reader-only doc generation system?

Jon:

I know that Paul Tuohy's RPGLEDOC [which was one of the
ones Charles listed originally] handles RPG IV. Not sure if it
has been adapted to accept free-form yet but it most certainly
handles RPGLE. Heck the product name would be particularly
silly if it didn't!

Perhaps the OP could quantify what "missing" meant in this
context.

Jon is asking how Paul Tuohy's RPGLEDOC falls short of your requirements.

I was basically asking the same thing, but with less knowledge of any
of the tools. Jon evidently has at least some familiarity with one of
them.

But I think this part of your response answers that:

I don't think any of the existing tools have been extended to free form
declarations or fully free.

So finally, we are left with:

no problem, they are open source I could add them. But I'm wondering if
there's any advantage to extending a non-RPG specific tool instead.

I would imagine it's much easier and more effective to modify one of
the existing RPG tools, particularly if you need it to run on the i.

I only went down the non-RPG rabbit hole because I thought for some
reason you had eliminated the existing RPG tools.

Now, if you happen to strongly prefer the generated output of Sphinx
(I believe this is one reason some folks use it to document languages
other than Python), it should be *comparatively* easy to adapt the
output of one of the RPG tools to a form usable by Sphinx (possibly
making use of AutoAPI). And this should run fine in PASE with either
of IBM's Pythons.

John Y.
--
This is the RPG programming on the IBM i (AS/400 and iSeries) (RPG400-L) mailing list
To post a message email: RPG400-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/rpg400-l
or email: RPG400-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/rpg400-l.

Please contact support@xxxxxxxxxxxx for any subscription related questions.

Help support midrange.com by shopping at amazon.com with our affiliate link: http://amzn.to/2dEadiD