> -----Original Message----- > From: Martin Sebor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 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? > > Eric Lemings wrote: > > > > I would post this to the dev list but I wanted to get > "heads up" before > > doing so and I don't recall what conclusions were drawn, if > any, from > > past discussions. > > Doesn't matter. You can always ask on the list. > > > > > Are there any plans for using Doxygen in STDCXX? I think > the answer is > > no but I don't think there is a reason not to. Is there? > > Only for the test driver, as a proof of concept. In fact, I was > just thinking I should suggest to you to take the lead on it :)
A proof-of-concept using a small component of the test driver would only require a few hours of investment, provided the right component is selected. (The whole test driver would require a few days of work I'm guesstimating.) 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 see that many of the rwtest header files already contains lots of inline doc comments though the source files do not. Has a proof-of-concept already been started? Should I create a Jira issue to complete this proof-of-concept? Should I submit changes to the 4.3.x branch? Brad. > > > > > If we were to use it, I was just thinking about one concern I think > > Martin has had in the past. Specifically putting > documentation in the > > header files. Indeed a valid concern. I was just thinking that the > > source files would contain all of the documentation since > they're only > > compiled once the impact on builds is minimal. And I am pretty sure > > that code contained in the headers can be labeled such that it is > > actually documented in the source files. For example, > src/bitset.cpp > > would document code contained in include/bitset (and > associated implicit > > includes) as well as the source file itself. > > > > I think this would work and it could be migrated on a > file-by-file basis > > just like I'm doing with the old Perforce tests. > > Marc and I brainstormed about how to deal with the library headers > a couple of months ago and reached a similar conclusion, that the > safest approach would be to completely decouple the Docxygen > sources from the library headers into files of their own. > > Unfortunately, none of us (TechDocs or Development) has the > bandwidth to undertake a project of this magnitude for the > existing stdcxx docs. > > Martin >
