stdcxx-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mark Brown <>
Subject Re: Exec utility test group reporting
Date Tue, 28 Aug 2007 04:29:34 GMT
> -----Original Message-----
> From:
> Sent: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 09:11:51 -0600
> To:
> Subject: Re: Exec utility test group reporting
> Greetings Mark
> At this point, the validity, usability and accuracy of the Doxygen
> comments in the exec utility is a theoretical exercise, as I don't think
> anyone's ever taken the step of generating the documentation pages from
> the source files.  That said, I've installed doxygen locally, and will
> share the results if I have time to play with it.

Well, I tried generating documentation for the stdcxx/util directory to see how Doxygen does.
The result is published on my home page: This
is my first attempt to use the site so pardon the appearance of the entry page. In my opinion,
it doesn't look half bad, don't you think?

> It would likely make sense to eventually store the generated docs
> somewhere in subversion, but the potential problem of documentation
> drift exists.  I suppose this shouldn't count as a strike against using
> Doxygen, as that potential exists for all documentation.

Would generating the documentation automatically be a solution?

-- Mark

> --Andrew Black
> Mark Brown wrote:
>> Hi Andrew,
>> I found myself needing documentation for the test driver in the past.
>> Since  you mentioned Doxygen comments in the exec utility, I'm wondering
>> if there is generated documentation available somewhere that I don't
>> know about. Could you point me in the right direction?
>> Many thanks!
>> -- Mark
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From:
>>> Sent: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 11:48:26 -0600
>>> To:
>>> Subject: Exec utility test group reporting
>>> Greetings all.
>>> Attached is a patch that aims to add some logic to the exec utility to
>>> report the type of executable being processed.  Part of the purpose of
>>> this change is to assist in making the result parsing more robust.
>>> I am not particularly satisfied with this change for a couple reasons.
>>> One is because the doxygen comments are getting out of date, and need
>>> to
>>> be gone over.  The second is the way data is passed from cmdopt.cpp to
>>> display.cpp.  The current method used is to overload the target_opts
>>> struct to include the new parameter, but this feels like the wrong way
>>> to do things.  This method was chosen because the verbose flag is
>>> currently included there, but the exec subsystem shouldn't care about
>>> either of these things.  (The verbose output mode also feels like it
>>> was
>>> hacked on, but that's irrelevant to this topic.)
>>> Does anyone have thoughts on this patch?  I should note that some
>>> changes to the windows infrastructure will be needed to keep the
>>> behavior in sync with the unix infrastructure.
>>> --Andrew Black
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> KEEP SPYWARE OFF YOUR COMPUTER - Protect your computer with Spyware
>> Terminator!
>> Visit and find out more!

FREE 3D MARINE AQUARIUM SCREENSAVER - Watch dolphins, sharks & orcas on your desktop!
Check it out at

View raw message