On Wed, Jun 09, 2010 at 01:57:03PM -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote: > Basile Starynkevitch wrote: > > >> Meanwhile, I think we should try to make use of the fact that RMS is > >> permitting auto-generated reference documentation (which I have been > >> instructed not to call a manual) using JavaDoc/Doxygen tools. If we use > >> those tools, and demonstrate their value, we're then in a stronger > >> position to say how generation of actual manuals is important. > > > What I don't understand is what is so special about Doxygen. > > Basile, there's nothing special about Doxygen. It's just an example of > a tool that generates cross-reference information. I think you can > reasonably distinguish the kind of thing that comes out of JavaDoc or > Doxygen from a manual. If you don't know what kind of output JavaDoc > and Doxygen produce, please go read about them for a while and look at > some examples.
I did read many doxygen generated documentation, and in my eyes, the documentation generated by MELT is ofvery similar nature: also, the cross-reference, inheritance, etc. The MELT generated documentation was heavily inspired by what Emacs & Doxygen are doing. So I still don't understand why generating cross-reference documentation with Doxygen for C++ code is permitted, while generating cross-reference documentation witb ÂMELT for MELT code is prohibited. Did *you* have a tiny look at the documentation of MELT generated by MELT? http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/MELT%20tutorial?action=AttachFile&do=view&target=GCC-MELT--gcc-internals-snapshot.pdf Cheers! -- Basile STARYNKEVITCH http://starynkevitch.net/Basile/ email: basile<at>starynkevitch<dot>net mobile: +33 6 8501 2359 8, rue de la Faiencerie, 92340 Bourg La Reine, France *** opinions {are only mines, sont seulement les miennes} ***
