stdcxx-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Marc Betz" <Marc.B...@roguewave.com>
Subject RE: Doxygen possible in STDCXX?
Date Wed, 07 May 2008 22:36:43 GMT
As Brad says, doxygen generation is trivial, and not difficult to set
up. It is completely automated at Rogue Wave. 

-----Original Message-----
From: Eric Lemings [mailto:Eric.Lemings@roguewave.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 07, 2008 3:29 PM
To: dev@stdcxx.apache.org
Subject: RE: Doxygen possible in STDCXX?

 

> -----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.

Brad.

Mime
View raw message