Hello.
Having thought some, I suggest we try to have all documentation (including the
doc/Developers directory) regrouped into Doxygen.
Unless I'm mistaking, we can ask Doxygen to include some information from
external sources, so it shouldn't be hard to merge eg object types, and such.
Also,
Hello.
I just did all files in the common/ subdirectory :)
(fixed indent and comments)
Ok, i didn't comment *all* parameters, i did feel stupid for writing obvious
things.
But resulting documentation looks nice ^_-
Now, I warn you: I will track and hang, after some smacking, anyone committing
Agreed. One thing we should perhaps check is if the terms of use for the
sf.net compile farm/shell server allows us to run doxygen on it, not
really sure it would but it would be nice if we could.
If nobody else is able to, I could run a nightly cron job (which won't
run unless the doxygen
Nicolas Weeger (Laposte) wrote:
Agreed. One thing we should perhaps check is if the terms of use for the
sf.net compile farm/shell server allows us to run doxygen on it, not
really sure it would but it would be nice if we could.
If nobody else is able to, I could run a nightly cron job (which
Mark Wedel wrote:
IIRC, the sourceforge folks only want the compile farm used for
interactive
use - no cron jobs, etc. Plus I seem to recall some odd things regarding
access
to web area (or maybe it was SVN) from the compile farm itself - something
with
it being inside the sourceforge
I think that the proposed changes are fine.
Updating the functions as they are changed or other nearby functions are
changed works, but the end result is that it means it can take a very long time
for all the functions to be documented.
And if the goal/hope is to have some coherent
Mark Wedel wrote:
OTOH, doing this cleanup or indentation fixes is something that can be done
in
small doses. I know that for myself, if I only have 30 minutes to spend, I
may
not going on a coding project, knowing I will be unable to finish it in that
time. However, I could
Hi,
On Sunday 24 December 2006 10:09 Nicolas Weeger (Laposte) wrote:
Another thing, is that in order to link to global variables or global
typedefs in doxygen comments, one needs to write it as either ::foobar
or as #foobar. Personally I don't like either much, but we should
decide which
Hi :)
So does anyone have any objections to 'doxygenificaiton' of the code? :)
None here, quite the opposite :)
Use Javadoc style comments as opposed to QT style comments. IMHO it's
easier on the eyes. For example:
/**
* This does foobar
*/
and *not*:
/*!
* This does foobar
*/
Hi everyone,
So does anyone have any objections to 'doxygenificaiton' of the code? :)
Also, we need to agree on a standard form of doxygen comments to use as
there are a few different syntax variations it accepts. In addition, if
we do agree that the code should be 'doxygenificatated', I think it
10 matches
Mail list logo
