To share what little research I've done, it seems that as gccxml is a representation of the compilers internal state, comments are not included in the output (having been ignored long ago by the compiler.) However line numbers are included for the definitions so reparsing the code for the comments is made significantly easier, especially as C++ is apparently notoriously hard to parse correctly.
Secondly, doxygen does a bit more than just display comments, so it'll take a fair bit of effort before anything comparable is created. It is possible that some kind of doxygen-sphinx bridge might be a more productive extension. I'm tempted to start looking at it but I've not found the time. Cheers, Michael On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 5:27 AM, Dan Craig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > +1 > > I'm looking to bring Sphinx into a C++ project that so far has been > documented (well, half heartedly) using Doxygen comments. I'd like to > somehow take advantage of that without having to re-write in rst. > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sphinx-dev" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sphinx-dev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
