Wow! Alexei, great start! ... and so many pages marked with 0 rank. I really appreciate your effort - it sets me back on earth and to work. I hope this rating would also make owners of code more ambitious, and would inspire them to write more/better comments to get a better rating :)
Question on output measurement: can we rate source files or code elements (structure, functions, etc) instead of html files? My concerns: - Many html files are autogenerated, their rating is N/A. examples: todo.html, functions_vars_0x68.html (listing of links to functions in alphabetical order - there are many pages like that) - Some results are duplicated, because each struct/function has an individual rating + rating of the file/group reference it belongs to. - Some files have a high rating (see the top candidate, for example), but it's generated from comments marked with @page. These don't belong to specific code, but create a narrative section. Evaluating these is complex, and perhaps, should not be done. My personal preference would be to move such generic explanations to component docs on the website and reserve Doxygen docs to API reference as much as possible (this is a subject for further discussion). - the listing of files is SO LONG... grouping them by file/component/type or otherwise organizing the output would make the whole rating more readable. I mean, from the current version, I can only make out the leaders (not files even, individual bits of them), and understand that the majority have 0 rating. This has its instructional impact, but I cannot see the areas where we are the best - bearable - worst, or see the approx distribution of powers... missing that info leaves me without direction on what to do. Question on data presentation: do you think we can have some post processing of the raw data that your script produces - to see the big picture? We have some metrics: graphics, pie charts, anything. This would instantly show the most important conclusions. I could do such metrics and post them regularly on Wiki. If anybody says they need such kind of info, I'd volunteer to help. Thank you, Nadya Morozova -----Original Message----- From: Fedotov, Alexei A [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2006 11:33 PM To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: [doc] What should be improved in DRLVM Doxygen documentation? Nadya, All, I have ranked the quality of Doxygen-generated DRLVM documentation and posted it to the following Wiki page: http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/DRLVM_Documentation_Quality All are welcome to check masterpieces of our documentation. All volunteers are welcome to improve page ranks by editing comments in DRLVM sources. With best regards, Alexei Fedotov, Intel Java & XML Engineering
