Re: Do we need doxygen file header?

Subject: Re: Do we need doxygen file header?
From: Stefan Seefeld (stefan_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-09-27 19:04:23

On 2018-09-27 02:49 PM, Mateusz Loskot wrote:

> Guys,
>
> Do we really need this?
>
> ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
> /// \file
> /// \brief A model of a heterogeneous pixel that is not byte aligned.
> Examples are bitmap (1-bit pixels) or 6-bit RGB (222)
> /// \author Lubomir Bourdev and Hailin Jin \n
> ///         Adobe Systems Incorporated
> /// \date   2005-2007 \n Last updated on September 28, 2006
> ///
> ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
>
> If we want to keep per-file description for Doxygen [1]
> perhaps we could simplify it to
>
> /// \file
> /// \brief ...
>
> and stick below the licence notice.
>
> Comments?

I'd get rid of it all, at least the bits you list above. All that is 
metainfo that can easily obtained from the git log.
Actual description of the file content would be different, though. So 
whenever there is meaningful content I'd keep it (though I suspect most 
of the time that content is associated with individual types, functions, 
etc., so we shouldn't it keep as file header).

Stefan

--
       ...ich hab' noch einen Koffer in Berlin...