> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 09:11:51 -0600 > To: stdcxx-dev@incubator.apache.org > Subject: Re: Exec utility test group reporting > > Greetings Mark > > At this point, the validity, usability and accuracy of the Doxygen > comments in the exec utility is a theoretical exercise, as I don't think > anyone's ever taken the step of generating the documentation pages from > the source files. That said, I've installed doxygen locally, and will > share the results if I have time to play with it.
Well, I tried generating documentation for the stdcxx/util directory to see how Doxygen does. The result is published on my home page: http://mark.g.brown.googlepages.com/stdcxxutil. This is my first attempt to use the site so pardon the appearance of the entry page. In my opinion, it doesn't look half bad, don't you think? > > It would likely make sense to eventually store the generated docs > somewhere in subversion, but the potential problem of documentation > drift exists. I suppose this shouldn't count as a strike against using > Doxygen, as that potential exists for all documentation. Would generating the documentation automatically be a solution? -- Mark > > --Andrew Black > > Mark Brown wrote: >> Hi Andrew, >> >> I found myself needing documentation for the test driver in the past. >> Since you mentioned Doxygen comments in the exec utility, I'm wondering >> if there is generated documentation available somewhere that I don't >> know about. Could you point me in the right direction? >> >> Many thanks! >> -- Mark >> >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> Sent: Thu, 23 Aug 2007 11:48:26 -0600 >>> To: stdcxx-dev@incubator.apache.org >>> Subject: Exec utility test group reporting >>> >>> Greetings all. >>> >>> Attached is a patch that aims to add some logic to the exec utility to >>> report the type of executable being processed. Part of the purpose of >>> this change is to assist in making the result parsing more robust. >>> >>> I am not particularly satisfied with this change for a couple reasons. >>> One is because the doxygen comments are getting out of date, and need >>> to >>> be gone over. The second is the way data is passed from cmdopt.cpp to >>> display.cpp. The current method used is to overload the target_opts >>> struct to include the new parameter, but this feels like the wrong way >>> to do things. This method was chosen because the verbose flag is >>> currently included there, but the exec subsystem shouldn't care about >>> either of these things. (The verbose output mode also feels like it >>> was >>> hacked on, but that's irrelevant to this topic.) >>> >>> Does anyone have thoughts on this patch? I should note that some >>> changes to the windows infrastructure will be needed to keep the >>> behavior in sync with the unix infrastructure. >>> >>> --Andrew Black >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> KEEP SPYWARE OFF YOUR COMPUTER - Protect your computer with Spyware >> Terminator! >> Visit http://www.spywareterminator.com/install and find out more! ____________________________________________________________ FREE 3D MARINE AQUARIUM SCREENSAVER - Watch dolphins, sharks & orcas on your desktop! Check it out at http://www.inbox.com/marineaquarium
