On 21 Sep 2011, at 22:52, Riccardo Mottola wrote: > Hi >> >> And the reason I brought this up is because I'm starting to document >> corebase. Seeing as I'm starting from scratch I'm having a serious look at >> which doc generator to use. It would probably be a quite large effort move >> all of current gnustep documentation to doxygen and probably something that >> wouldn't happen overnight, as you suggest. > Well, i also think that projects gravitating around gnustep.org should use > all the same document generator. Thus I think using autogsdoc is a good thing > for other projects too and that is what I use and recommend for all GAP > projects. > > it's a bit like most people use javadoc with java. It's the the standard one.
Just a heads up, given the scope of gnustep, if it were to change to a different documentation tool, appledoc might be a sane one to consider. It uses doxygen style comments, but produces much nicer (and more apple documentation like) output: http://www.gentlebytes.com/home/appledocapp/ It's also written in Obj-C and Cocoa, so if GNUstep could eat this dog food it might be a nice flag to fly. Bob _______________________________________________ Discuss-gnustep mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnustep
