[Lazarus] documentation snapshot

[Marco van de Voort]

On Sun, Apr 21, 2013 at 02:04:12PM +0200, Reinier Olislagers wrote:
> > IMHO the IDE docs should be taken offline (or readonly), and quickly
> > reformed to some master format, and managed in SVN, versioned, like the rest
> > of the docs. 
> Good idea; as long as they can be as easily edited as on the wiki...

That's not possible in a reasonable timeframe.

> > I think that needs to happen anyway, even if online is kept leading, just to
> > get proper versioning.
> If you take versioning as matching a certain Laz version with a certain
> help document, I do agree, but that would need to be done for FPC as
> well, IIUC.

FPC does so since forever, since it only uses the wiki as it should be:
public writable dumping ground for the more esotheric and/or short-lived topics.

Every release comes with full offline docs in dist/<version>/docs/

True, it isn't versioned (branched) in SVN (and I like to see that change,
for about a decade now), but that is a relative minor issue.

> As for the version control interpretation of versioning (the one I think
> you mean): no comments except a reference to our earlier discussion on
> this point...

I mean both.
 
> > 22754 is difficult. result is not a keyword, but a pseudo variable, and its
> > existence depends on context. So you can't simply add it to the keywords
> > (ref.kwd), and it is not declared in each function either.
> What happens if you do add it to ref.kwd with the caution that it works
> only with objfpc & Delphi modes?

Any result identifier will point to this. Also when it is not an implicit
returnvalue, but e.g. a fieldname.

> Ok, it will give false positives in procedures and TP code, but that may
> be better than not giving any help.

It will also give false positives in other modes.