I have spoken with him about this, and I wasn't sure if it was worth it.
Much of the documentation we write is pretty free-form. I am not sure how
that could be inlined. Maybe it's just the wrong style? Do people really
like putting all that documentation into their source code? Literate
programming is nice for a data analysis in a vignette, but I'm not so sure
about IRanges. Folding might help. What's so bad about Rd anyway? I guess
I'm just more of a "use the source, Luke" kind of guy and like direct
control over the output.

What would be really nice is a way to generate documentation on methods and
classes dynamically, as they are registered. Some sort of alternative to
always calling showMethods, getClass, etc.

Michael

On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 6:42 AM, Steve Lianoglou <
mailinglist.honeypot@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi devs,
>
> Hadley is in the midst of trying to get roxygen2 to better handle S4
> class/methods.
>
> I thought there would be some folks here (hi bioc-core) who would be
> well suited to give useful feedback given the monumental documentation
> in some of the bioconductor packages.
>
> If anyone has time to share some feedback, I'm sure it'd make his end
> result much better and would be a large boon to the R community at
> large, since I think roxygen goes a long way to making writing
> documentation a lot less painful :-)
>
> Here is his post:
>
> http://lists.r-forge.r-project.org/pipermail/roxygen-devel/2011-November/000318.html
>
> Cheers,
> -steve
>
> --
> Steve Lianoglou
> Graduate Student: Computational Systems Biology
>  | Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center
>  | Weill Medical College of Cornell University
> Contact Info: http://cbio.mskcc.org/~lianos/contact
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bioc-devel@r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/bioc-devel
>

	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]