From: Jeff Garland (jeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2001-03-11 18:22:37
> > I think that this is only the tip of the Iceberg. We really need to
> > using something like Doxygen to generate XML models from the actual code.
> > Otherwise, you will be typing everything you want to document twice, or
> > extracting your header file from your XML (screaming heard in the
> > I use Doxygen for HTML output, but I believe there is an experimental XML
> > available.
> AFAIK there are still holes in Doxygen's parsing... and I assume there
> always will be ;-)
This claim has been made on this list before and I consider it bogus since I
have been able to build documentation for STLport, Boost, and a huge amount of
other C++ code. There are holes in plenty of actual C++ compiler's parsers
too...that doesn't stop us from using them.
> Maybe we should explore this instead:
Looks like it has potential. Has anyone used it?
> Only this: unless someone is prepared to take this on and commit to a
> short-term date for delivery of a solution, we should really be looking at
> approaches which will not:
> 1. Require a long learning curve
> 2. Require much development to produce.
> The rest may be of interest as theoretical ideas but if we need solutions of
> this sort (and I'm not sure we do, yet), we ought to keep the practical
> issues in mind.
Given these criteria we should stick with HTML....
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk