[fpc-devel] Troubles with FPDOC in 2.5.1 and 2.4.1

[Marco van de Voort]

In our previous episode, Mattias Gaertner said:
> Yes.
> I think implementation needs good comments. The local types and
> variables don't need fpdoc docs, do they?
> If someone wants to use fpdoc for implementation, maybe it should
> be made optional?

Mattias, what did you use for testing? makeskel/fpdoc?

I've searched for a test that simply dumped the parsetree (e.g. to check if
^g is really transformed to something like a char/string literal), but
haven't found anything.