On 17.03.2010, at 11:04, Albrecht Schlosser wrote:

> On 17.03.2010, at 10:07, manolo gouy wrote:
>>> 
>>> Did you also see the lots of warnings when creating the docs?
>>> Before the Fl_Printer addition we had only one or two warnings.
>>> Do you have any plans or ideas how to reduce the warnings again?
>>> Some look trivial, but others may be difficult to "repair".
>>> 
>>> Albrecht
>> 
>> Yes, I see these warnings.
>> 
>> We have now basically two names for each graphics function, e.g.,
>> fl_rect() and Fl_Device::rect()
>> and only one (generally, but not always, the second) is documented,
>> so this creates a warning for the undocumented one.
>> I believe the solution would be to hide from Doxygen the name
>> Fl_Device::<i>graphics_function</i>() because we don't want
>> end-users to use it, and instead document the
>> <i>fl_graphics_function</i>() name.
>> 
>> Does that sound correct ?
> 
> Yes, that sounds correct. But that would involve much moving of
> Doxygen docs to the right places. And maybe we should consider
> to use Matt's proposal \internal (or similar, don't remember
> exactly) to hide internals rather than using #if[n]def FL_DOXYGEN.

I suggest that we keep the documentation of the fl_xxx calls as they are. But 
Fl_Device and all its methods should be documented nevertheless (and references 
(\see) the corresponding fl_xxx function), because a developer may want to 
write a new Fl_Device for some exotic embedded display.

Marking the Fl_Device class members \internal may be a good idea.

- Matthias
_______________________________________________
fltk-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk-dev

Reply via email to