Comments on: KDevelop4′s Documentation Integration

By: apol

apol — Mon, 21 Jun 2010 14:54:28 +0000

@Agroni You can just create a kdevplatform adapted Documentation plugin.

You can ask us in the list how to do so.

By: Agroni

Agroni — Fri, 18 Jun 2010 15:44:37 +0000

Can you guide us how to integrate glibc documentation.

By: Andreas S

Andreas S — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 21:17:22 +0000

Great. Impressive. This beats every MS VS environment i have ever seen …
Thanks for the great tool.

By: apol

apol — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 23:09:05 +0000

Thanks for these positive comments!

#5 We have some work towards a Windows version but nobody really working on it, so unless we have someone really pushing it we’re not having support for now. Should be possible to run it on windows, though.

#8 It is thought to be flexible, so yes, we’re likely to have integration with javadoc at some point (when we have java xD)

By: Peter Lewis

Peter Lewis — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 08:49:10 +0000

Hi, this looks great!

Are there any plans to integrate java documentation in this way? Will it be easy using this architecture?

Thanks!

By: Ed

Ed — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 18:10:19 +0000

Very useful to be able to see the relevant documentation on demand.

Keep up the good work

By: Hj

Hj — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 20:23:20 +0000

Cool!

By: gnoro

gnoro — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 16:20:23 +0000

Very nice indeed. All the KDevelop posts look very imperssive and I can’t wait for a stable version.
What I wonder: Will KDevelop run under Windows or is the Windows “Port” behind and will not be ready when the *nix KDevelop final version hits the surface?

Keep up the great work folks!

By: hron84

hron84 — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 11:04:09 +0000

Wooow, this’s a very cool feature… Btw, how can you make visible the assistant widget on a second picture? Is it some playground plugin, or plugin in core kdevelop?

By: Diederik van der Boor

Diederik van der Boor — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 08:38:35 +0000

Really nice stuff

One thing I did notice, the following caption seams a bit redundant to me:
- ‘class QString Access: public Type: class’ definition
why not just “class QString”?