Re: Scheme documentation question

[Chris.Bitmead@misys.com.au]

>I don't like repeating the signatures, firstly because they are easy
>to extract from the actual definitions (and their presence in the
definitions
>is mandated by the scheme standard), secondly because one gets out of
>date with the other.

Well, I'm predicting that when a standard object system becomes available,
people
will make a lot more use of it. And you WOULD need to repeat the signature
in the case of OO functions (which I agree is painful). It would be nice if
 the
standard documentation method was similar to the OO one.

Something like a keyword might be nice. (define :doco "something" (foo bar)
 ...)