Re: What should the return type be for constructorsynopsis and destructorsynopsis.

[Richard Quadling <rquadling@googlemail.com>]

On 13 May 2010 09:48, Richard Quadling <rquadling@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I'm refining some documentation (PHP) which has used methodsynopsis
> for the constructor and the destructor ...
>
>  <methodsynopsis>
>   <type>void</type>
>   <methodname>HttpRequestPool::__construct</methodname>
>   <methodparam choice="opt">
>      <type>HttpRequest</type>
>      <parameter>request</parameter>
>   </methodparam>
>  </methodsynopsis>
>
>
> is now ...
>
>  <constructorsynopsis>
>   <void />
>   <methodname>HttpRequestPool::__construct</methodname>
>   <methodparam choice="opt">
>      <type>HttpRequest</type>
>      <parameter>request</parameter>
>    </methodparam>
>  </constructorsynopsis>
>
> Is this "correct"?
>
> For "void", the tdg says "An empty element in a function synopsis
> indicating that the function in question takes no arguments", but
> later says "The Void element produces generated text that indicates
> the function has no arguments (or returns nothing). "
>
> So, I think it is right.
>
> Regards,
>
> Richard.

A slight addition to this question. If a
constructor/destructor/method/function has no parameters and doesn't
return anything, does that mean there should be 2 <void>'s?

i.e.

void function xyz(void)

sort of thing being expressed as ...

<methodsynopsis>
 <void />
 <methodname>xyz</methodname>
 <void />
</methodsynopsis>

This seems to be right against tdg.

Regards,

Richard.

-- 
-----
Richard Quadling
"Standing on the shoulders of some very clever giants!"
EE : http://www.experts-exchange.com/M_248814.html
EE4Free : http://www.experts-exchange.com/becomeAnExpert.jsp
Zend Certified Engineer : http://zend.com/zce.php?c=ZEND002498&r=213474731
ZOPA : http://uk.zopa.com/member/RQuadling