incubator-stdcxx-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Martin Sebor <se...@roguewave.com>
Subject Re: Doxygen possible in STDCXX?
Date Wed, 07 May 2008 22:50:26 GMT
Eric Lemings wrote:
>  
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Martin Sebor [mailto:msebor@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Martin Sebor
>> Sent: Wednesday, May 07, 2008 1:24 PM
>> To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Doxygen possible in STDCXX?
>>
>> Eric Lemings wrote:
>>>  
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Martin Sebor [mailto:msebor@gmail.com] On Behalf Of 
>> Martin Sebor
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, May 07, 2008 10:52 AM
>>>> To: Eric Lemings
>>>> Cc: Marc Betz
>>>> Subject: Re: Doxygen possible in STDCXX?
>>>>
>> [...]
>>> I would suggest using the printf directives (STDCXX-871) but there's
>>> no C++ code (or not enough) related to that component to use as a
>>> proof-of-concept.
>> I don't see why the language would matter. The documentation
>> will look the same regardless if rw_printf() is implemented
>> in C or in assembly.
> 
> Well to analyze potential risk associated with translating C++ -- the
> documented vs. implemented C++ function signatures that Marc alluded
> to for example.
> 
> ...
>> My feeling is that unless we set up an infrastructure to
>> automatically generate and publish the generate docs it's
>> going to hard to get motivated to go to the trouble of
>> adding Doxygen-style comments even in the test driver.
> 
> Infrastructure?  What infrastructure?  All that's needed is
> Doxygen and a Doxyfile and even the latter is optional...
> technically at least.

As I said: "infrastructure to automatically generate and
publish the generated docs." I.e., someone needs to set
up a cron job to check out the sources, run Doxygen, and
publish the results on the stdcxx site.

Martin

Mime
View raw message