On 19/01/2019 19:29, Robert Heller wrote:
I'm presuming these classes are not actually in a public API library -- either
they are defined in "private" header files (header files only ever included in
the corresponding to the C++ main for the exe in question) or defined directly
in the C++ files specific to the exe in question). It might also make sense to
NOT use "correct" Doxygen commentting -- include comments of course, but not
formatted in a way that Doxygen recognizes (eg replace /** with /*+, etc.) --
Doxygen won't pick them up and won't document them (and won't get confused or
create confusing documentation). Since they don't document a public API, there
is no harm. Or don't actually feed the "private" header files or C++ source
code to Doxygen (unless you are using the C++ main program to create man1 or
man8 pages, or something like that -- eg program usage docs).
As Richard says "That isn't really how Doxygen is intended to be used...", you
probably *don't* want to "document" a non-public API, which is what these
classes sound like what they are. Doxygen is meant to document *public* APIs
(programs, classes, functions, etc.) that will be called by programs written
by other people, who would then link with your library or run your main
programs (your .exe files).
Well, an executable doesn't have a public API of course, it's a closed
unit so it's all private. My goal here is overal project documentation.
It is for new developers, allowing them to better understand the system.
Is that actually an unusual use for Doxygen? It seems perfect for doing
something like this - well, apart from the issue under discussion...
_______________________________________________
Doxygen-users mailing list
Doxygen-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/doxygen-users
