On Fri, 12 Apr 2002, Rick Potts wrote: > I don't understand why we should treat 'core components' differently and > short change them on future documentation? If i recall, doxygen has > difficulty creating documentation for 'multiple things' in a single > header file. > > What is so WRONG about wanting/requiring each component that we provide > to have distinct, independent documentation (that is not tied to our > particular build packaging?). The simplest and most flexible way to > provide independent documentation is to have each component provide its > own documentation in it's own header file. > > i agree that currently, this looks like overkill... but i hope that in > the future, when ALL of our components have lots of useful > documentation, we will be glad that we were farsignted and chose to > allow components to be documented independently. > > this approach does not prevent having a nsCCoreNeckoStuff.h file for > developers which includes all of the individual component heaader files. > but i don't think that we should shortchange documentation just to > avoid 'extra' header files. > > -- rick >
My point is that there is nothing to document in there - only contract ids, CIDs, and class names. The vast majority of documentation for nsCFoo would simply consist of @see nsIFoo.idl - very few contract ids promise to implement multiple interfaces. Bradley
