Jani Nikula <[email protected]> writes:

> There's always the question, if you're putting a lot of effort into
> making kernel-doc closer to an actual C parser, why not put all that
> effort into using and adapting to, you know, an actual C parser?

Not speaking to the current effort but ... in the past, when I have
contemplated this (using, say, tree-sitter), the real problem is that
those parsers simply strip out the comments.  Kerneldoc without comments
... doesn't work very well.  If there were a parser without those
problems, and which could be made to do the right thing with all of our
weird macro usage, it would certainly be worth considering.

jon

Reply via email to