Re: docstring work (was: Re: should GOOPS be built-in?)

[ryan yeske <rcyeske at sfu dot ca>]

> The most important thing, though, is to not place the burden of all
> the documentation on one person: what we may need most of all is a bit
> of organization to prevent a whole bunch of people from documenting
> the same things; possibly we could set up a page at gnu.org for this.

I am interested in helping out in the writing/gathering of the
remaining undocumented primitives.  I am at a bit of a loss as to how
to format them though.  Existing doc-strings are in TeXinfo, should
that be the format of new ones?  Should the argument names in the
doc-string match the C argument names?

I imagine a lot of the work is already done (in documents like
r[45]rs.texi and others) and it would just be a matter of pasting text
from those documents into the source code.

rcy