This way their name doesn't get mangle by the broken magic. It will also
eventually allow to `error()` in the template when the implicit
`@function` is used.
This commit also fixes a large number of issues found while
proof-reading everything.
Do it now since the future awful.popup and notification widget
also uses it.
The `load_ldoc.cmake` changes allow to include `.ldoc` blocks in
existing ldoc comments. Previously, it added some extra newlines
and an autogenerated comments saying the content below was imported.
The problem is that this prevented the system to be used for shared
function arguments.
This commit also renames the `wibar` argument table from `arg` to
`args` as the name has to be the same in the `wibox` and `wibar`
constructor for this to work.
* wibar: Add beautiful variables
This was done a few weeks ago for the notifications. This was
requested on IRC a while ago to have different font for the wibars.
Now that shapes are supported, it also makes more sense for the
border.
The function that is documented as awful.wibox.stretch is deprecated,
because it was removed (that's not a deprecation, is it?!?). For the
replacement, we used "@see stretch". However, LDoc was randomly
resolving this reference to awful.wibar.stretch (good) or
awful.wibox.stretch (bad; the see points to the element where it
appears).
Fix this by spelling out the "full name" of the function in the @see.
Related-to: https://github.com/awesomeWM/awesome/issues/834
Signed-off-by: Uli Schlachter <psychon@znc.in>
It does not provide much value. The version number is already known to
ldoc globally in the "description" variable.
Signed-off-by: Uli Schlachter <psychon@znc.in>
The requirement to call add_signal() was added to catch typos. However, this
requirement became increasingly annoying with property::<name> signals and e.g.
gears.object allowing arbitrary properties to be changed.
All of this ended up in a single commit because tests/examples fails if I first
let add_signal() emit a deprecation warning.
Signed-off-by: Uli Schlachter <psychon@znc.in>
The behavior was changed during the rewrite. This was a mistake
as it was assumed (wrongly) that nobody used this function with
wiboxes other than "wibars" (awful.wibox).
Fixes#917
Why:
* Two different (but related) concepts had the same name
* Users were confused for years on IRC
* The wibar name was already in use in some doc to avoid confusion
Emmanuel Lepage Vallee
Kevin Zander
Uli Schlachter
Uli Schlachter
actionless