[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Sven Neumann) writes:
> > I have some experience documenting the C/C++ source of a project. For
> > the DODS project (http://unidata.ucar.edu/packages/dods) I use a
> > package called doc++ which is barely supported, but works well. Doc++
> > has a home page, and we support a slightly modified (i.e. debugged)
> > version of it. It creates html and LaTeX, and works well with
> > hyperlatex and a set of LaTeX macros I've developed for the same
> > project. It's not as sexy and au courant as XML and DTDs, but it
> > is simple and works, and creates hard copy and web output equally well.
> > You can find more at http://top.gso.uri.edu/dods.html . The
> > documentation on that page was made with this package, and the
> > programmer's ref was generated with the doc++ stuff.
> Well, does it support the GTK+ object system like gtk-doc does? I guess
> not and that's why I suggest that we stop discussing what tool to use
> since I doubt we will find something better suited to our needs.
> To explain what I mean, here are a few lines out of the README explaining
> the important part:
> gtkdoc-scanobj: Creates a small C program which is compiled and run to query
> your library about which GtkObjects it contains, the signals
> they emit, and any Args they have. If your module has no
> GtkObjects then you don't need to use this.
> Our module contains GtkObjects, so we might come to the conclusion that we
> absolutely need to use this.
I second this.
doc++ is nice, but we really want to use gtk-doc.