Athosvk added inline comments.
================
Comment at: tools/clang-doc/ClangDocReporter.h:39
// Info for named types (parameters, members).
struct NamedType {
std::string Type;
----------------
Storing the type information seems more suitable than storing just the name and
type as a string. In my view, the frontend creates a format suitable for
(almost) any backend to use without further parsing. This would for example
require me to parse part of the name to get the namespace.
================
Comment at: tools/clang-doc/ClangDocReporter.h:75
struct Info {
bool isDefined = false;
std::string FullyQualifiedName;
----------------
NItpick but should probably be 'IsDefined'
================
Comment at: tools/clang-doc/ClangDocReporter.h:87
std::string MangledName;
std::string DefinitionFile;
std::string ReturnType;
----------------
Seems common to almost all Info structs, so you can probably move it to
the/some base.
Namespaces do seem unrelated, so maybe you can make another struct inbetween?
E.g. something like struct SymbolInfo : Info which contains a field for
DefinitionFile and Locations (since that may not be used for namespaces either).
Additionally, what will you do when you merge this output information from
multiple compilation untis back together? Only one should have the
DefinitionFile set as the other compilation units won't see the definition.
What happens if a function stays undefined? Can you generate documentation for
it?
================
Comment at: tools/clang-doc/ClangDocReporter.h:88
std::string DefinitionFile;
std::string ReturnType;
llvm::SmallVector<NamedType, 4> Params;
----------------
This should probably be a NamedType like the parameters
================
Comment at: tools/clang-doc/ClangDocReporter.h:89
std::string ReturnType;
llvm::SmallVector<NamedType, 4> Params;
AccessSpecifier Access;
----------------
Perhaps you could already attach the parameter comments to this? So something
like a
```
struct ParamInfo
{
NamedType Type;
std::string/CommentInfo Description/CommentInfo;
}
```
Or are you planning to keep this to a later stage? At this point it seems like
the backend will have to parse a CommentInfo struct to attach comments to
parameters etc. manually
================
Comment at: tools/clang-doc/ClangDocReporter.h:93
struct NamespaceInfo : public Info {
+ llvm::StringMap<std::unique_ptr<FunctionInfo>> Functions;
----------------
Currently info stores the locations of occurrences, but this seems like a hard
thing to do when it comes namespaces. Is it useful to have this particular
information?
https://reviews.llvm.org/D41102
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
