On 01/04/2012 03:30 PM, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
With autodoc no longer used to document C++, the next step would be to
either replace its use to generate IDL docu as well (and completely
remove autodoc), or at least remove the C++-specific autodoc code. The
SDK includes the autodoc executable,
Le 05/01/12 20:11, Stephan Bergmann a écrit :
Hi Stephan,
I simply sticked to the --with-doxygen scheme for now. Tinderbox
maintainers, please remember to install doxygen if not yet present
(preferred) or add --without-doxygen to autogen.lastrun (which will
cause the C++ documentation to be
Hi *,
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 3:38 PM, Alexander Thurgood
alex.thurg...@gmail.com wrote:
Le 05/01/12 20:11, Stephan Bergmann a écrit :
I simply sticked to the --with-doxygen scheme for now. Tinderbox
maintainers, please remember to install doxygen if not yet present
(preferred) or add
Le 09/01/12 15:51, Christian Lohmaier a écrit :
Hi Christian,
It is only required if you want to build the documentation from the
source-files. So for release-builds: yes, it is required. For the
casual developer: No, not required, and you don't usually build the
SDK in that case at all.
On 01/09/2012 04:12 PM, Alexander Thurgood wrote:
Ah, thanks for that, most useful, but doesn't the SDK need to be built
if you are building extensions, or am I conufusing that with the ODK ?
The names SDK, ODK, and UDK are used somewhat interchangeably.
But the SDK is not needed to build
On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 4:12 PM, Alexander Thurgood
alex.thurg...@gmail.com wrote:
Le 09/01/12 15:51, Christian Lohmaier a écrit :
Hi Christian,
It is only required if you want to build the documentation from the
source-files. So for release-builds: yes, it is required. For the
casual
Hi Christian,
Le 09/01/12 16:34, Christian Lohmaier a écrit :
Yes, and that's why I wrote it is required for release-builds. But
unless you publish your LibreOffice SDK/ODK package for download, then
you are free to build the ODK without generated documentation. So when
you build you can: *
Le 09/01/12 17:40, Norbert Thiebaud a écrit :
Hi Norbert,
FYI:
binary of doxygen for acOSX are available here:
http://www.stack.nl/~dimitri/doxygen/download.html#latestsrc
after install (assuming a standard drag-and-drop in Applications)
sudo ln -s
Le 09/01/12 17:42, Christian Lohmaier a écrit :
Hi Christian,
No, you misunderstood. You don't need to install doxygen if you only
want to provide extensions.
If you want to build offer the LO SDK itself for download, then (and
only then) you need it.
Ah, OK, sorry, I was a bit
On Thu, 2012-01-05 at 20:11 +0100, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
On 01/04/2012 03:30 PM, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
If there are no objections, I will commit this to master later this week.
Done,
http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=58ab12acf576a765ec47cc2753ba57643e51d653
On 06/01/12 11:07, Caolán McNamara wrote:
On Thu, 2012-01-05 at 20:11 +0100, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
On 01/04/2012 03:30 PM, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
If there are no objections, I will commit this to master later this week.
Done,
On Fri, 2012-01-06 at 11:47 +0100, Michael Stahl wrote:
we still use that for IDL docu (and don't forget cosv module)
damn :-( its such a big-ass chunk of code I was hopeful it was a goner.
C.
___
LibreOffice mailing list
On 01/06/2012 11:47 AM, Michael Stahl wrote:
On 06/01/12 11:07, Caolán McNamara wrote:
So, does that mean we can now remove autodoc and udm from the tree ?
we still use that for IDL docu (and don't forget cosv module)
Yeah, next step I plan to do is get rid of autodoc for IDL, too (after
On 01/04/2012 03:30 PM, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
If there are no objections, I will commit this to master later this week.
Done,
http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=58ab12acf576a765ec47cc2753ba57643e51d653
Switch from autodoc to doxygen for SDK C++ documentation.
Hi all,
http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=8907d159378b518a769e9f8c4f67290ec588a77d
Temporary hack to work around autodoc bug made it even more evident
that our home-brewed autodoc is not up to its task and should be replaced.
So, I tried to switch to doxygen when
On 01/04/2012 03:58 PM, Hanno Meyer-Thurow wrote:
I would not like to see a new configure flag for doxygen, the odk flag suffices;
generate the documentation anyway. Otherwise it is always good to use standards.
Do you mean, those who do not have doxygen and don't want to or can't
install it
On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 15:30:03 +0100
Stephan Bergmann sberg...@redhat.com wrote:
Hi all,
Hi Stephan,
http://cgit.freedesktop.org/libreoffice/core/commit/?id=8907d159378b518a769e9f8c4f67290ec588a77d
Temporary hack to work around autodoc bug made it even more evident
that our home-brewed
On Wednesday 04 of January 2012, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
(One downside of doxygen appears to be that
it does not generate an overview of all the non-class-member entities,
like free functions; it only generates overviews of all the namespaces,
classes, and files.)
I'm not sure what you mean
Stephan Bergmann wrote:
And it worked quite well.
Yay! \o/
The build then has an additional dependency on the doxygen
executable as a prerequisite. This can be controlled via
--with-doxygen, where an explicit --without-doxygen disables
generation of the C/C++ documentation in odk (and
On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 03:30:03PM +0100, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
So, I tried to switch to doxygen when generating the C/C++ header
documentation in odk/pack/gendocu.
And it worked quite well.
If there are no objections, I will commit this to master later this week.
Yes, yes, yes! great!
On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 15:57:58 +0100
Stephan Bergmann sberg...@redhat.com wrote:
On 01/04/2012 03:58 PM, Hanno Meyer-Thurow wrote:
I would not like to see a new configure flag for doxygen, the odk flag
suffices;
generate the documentation anyway. Otherwise it is always good to use
On 01/04/2012 04:15 PM, Lubos Lunak wrote:
On Wednesday 04 of January 2012, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
(One downside of doxygen appears to be that
it does not generate an overview of all the non-class-member entities,
like free functions; it only generates overviews of all the namespaces,
classes,
On 01/04/2012 04:11 PM, Thorsten Behrens wrote:
Stephan Bergmann wrote:
With autodoc no longer used to document C++, the next step would be
to either replace its use to generate IDL docu as well (and
completely remove autodoc), or at least remove the C++-specific
autodoc code. The SDK includes
On 01/04/2012 04:17 PM, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote:
On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 03:30:03PM +0100, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
With autodoc no longer used to document C++, the next step would be
to either replace its use to generate IDL docu as well (and
completely remove autodoc), or at least remove the
On 01/04/2012 04:35 PM, Hanno Meyer-Thurow wrote:
On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 15:57:58 +0100
Stephan Bergmannsberg...@redhat.com wrote:
On 01/04/2012 03:58 PM, Hanno Meyer-Thurow wrote:
[...]
Doxygen won't be shipped with LO source like all the other 3rd parties?!
Interesting ...
God no!
And
On Wednesday 04 of January 2012, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
On 01/04/2012 04:15 PM, Lubos Lunak wrote:
On Wednesday 04 of January 2012, Stephan Bergmann wrote:
(One downside of doxygen appears to be that
it does not generate an overview of all the non-class-member entities,
like free
On 01/04/2012 05:11 PM, Lubos Lunak wrote:
Ah, so the URL above is still generated the old way?
Yes.
But doxygen can generate such an overview too - see
http://api.kde.org/4.x-api/kdelibs-apidocs/kdeui/html/globals.html (it is
the 'File Members' link on the left).
Ah, good to know.
On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 17:01:32 +0100
Stephan Bergmann sberg...@redhat.com wrote:
On 01/04/2012 04:35 PM, Hanno Meyer-Thurow wrote:
On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 15:57:58 +0100
Stephan Bergmannsberg...@redhat.com wrote:
On 01/04/2012 03:58 PM, Hanno Meyer-Thurow wrote:
[...]
Doxygen won't be
On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 12:28 PM, Hanno Meyer-Thurow h@web.de wrote:
On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 17:01:32 +0100
Stephan Bergmann sberg...@redhat.com wrote:
On 01/04/2012 04:35 PM, Hanno Meyer-Thurow wrote:
On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 15:57:58 +0100
Stephan Bergmannsberg...@redhat.com wrote:
On
On 01/04/2012 07:28 PM, Hanno Meyer-Thurow wrote:
On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 17:01:32 +0100
Stephan Bergmannsberg...@redhat.com wrote:
On 01/04/2012 04:35 PM, Hanno Meyer-Thurow wrote:
On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 15:57:58 +0100
Stephan Bergmannsberg...@redhat.com wrote:
On 01/04/2012 03:58 PM, Hanno
For what it is worth, I would provide an argument so that you could
enable or disable the generation. I don't really care what the default
is, as long as I can enable or disable doxygen.
What can become easy hacks, though, is to clean up the warnings
doxygen still produces ...
That seems
31 matches
Mail list logo
