On 3/17/07, Dennis Schridde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I did DoxyComments in the header before, because that way they are easily accessible when you have a look at the declaration. No need to search for the definition. (Which is usualy at line 3276 in an ugly formated code file not ordered like the header is and thus more difficult to find than in a small header.) Additionaly to that, if you would want to use the header as an API definition for a library and thus install only the header and not the sourcecode, you have lost the comments. That were my thoughts when I did it the other way. But if documentation would be widely present you could of course create the doxydocs and use them instead of the headers. This seems also to be the way Trolltech does it with Qt, so it can't be a big problem. (Qt is documented very good, though.) So you got my ok, too. --Dennis
hmmm should we start commenting the source using doxygen doc syntaxs or we should wait until all clean-ups are finished? I think all libs are included in wz now(I saw them as individual projects and linked staticly? in 1.10 source),so commenting in .c is probably better than in .h imo,since we dont need to produce a big engine library file and let the game executable binaries to static-link against it like other games do.
_______________________________________________ Warzone-dev mailing list Warzone-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/warzone-dev
