Hi,
> Doxygen doesn't apply the input filter for examples? That's lame, but > hopefully they can add an option to do that. I have tried multiple filter scripts but none of them was applied to the examples. The 'examples' module does not seem to experience a lot of love anyway, see e.g. https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=149253 (yes, Barry, that ticket is from 2004...) > @Jed: I've disabled the EXTRACT_ALL switch, now only documentation > for commented entities is generated. Static functions should not be > shown anyway (EXTRACT_PRIVATE = NO). I could also set > EXCLUDE_PATTERN to something like *_Private and/or *_Internal. Do > you know a better systematic way of identifying internal stuff > without touching sources? > > > PETSc doesn't have any public functions containing underscores (only > enums and feature macros). Can you exclude functions that way? From the > docs, it looks like EXCLUDE_PATTERNS excludes entire files while > EXCLUDE_SYMBOLS has all symbols lumped together. Sadly, that seems to > only take a glob rather than a regex, and it lumps all symbol types > together. Sorry, I meant EXCLUDE_SYMBOLS rather than EXCLUDE_PATTERN. Even though it does not allow regex, the wildcards should be sufficient. > Would strict symbol visibility help limit which symbols doxygen > considers to be public? There is a --with-visibility flag that will > avoid exporting the internal symbols. Hmm, do you still see internal functions floating around in the doxygen output? I think they disappeared when I turned off EXTRACT_ALL. Best regards, Karli
