the mx code is old and the version you mentiom even more. Mx will remain used in the forseeable future
regards martin On 27 mei 2010, at 08:37, Alex Dubov <oa...@yahoo.com> wrote: > Greetings. > > I understand, that this issue was probably discussed before, but I > couldn't quite find a way to search the list archive. > > It appears to me, that mx version 3, found on savannah.nongnu.org, > is somewhat out of sync with the one used for monetdb (@mal and > @include tags are not supported by it; adding the former was > trivial, while I've set the later to no-op, as included *.mx files > are nowhere to be found in the monetdb source tree). The mx doc > formatter itself is also quite underdeveloped, compared to what we > came to expect from systems like doxygen or sphinx. > > In light of the above, I wonder, are there any plans to switch to a > different code documentation system (doxygen?) or is the mx tool > intended for future development? > > > > > > --- > --- > --- > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > _______________________________________________ > Monetdb-developers mailing list > Monetdb-developers@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/monetdb-developers ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Monetdb-developers mailing list Monetdb-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/monetdb-developers
