Re: Do we need doxygen file header?

Subject: Re: Do we need doxygen file header?
From: Mateusz Loskot (mateusz_at_[hidden])
Date: 2018-09-27 20:40:59

On Thu, 27 Sep 2018 at 22:15, Christian Henning <chhenning_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 3:09 PM Mateusz Loskot <mateusz_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> > On Thu, 27 Sep 2018 at 21:04, Stefan Seefeld <stefan_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> > > On 2018-09-27 02:49 PM, Mateusz Loskot wrote:
> > >
> > > > 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
> > > > ///
> > > >
> > ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
> > > >
> >
>
>  Can you leave the \brief, \author, \data?

\author is or moves to the copyright
\data is in git
\brief I do keep indeed, wherever the comment does include meaningful info.

GIL code itself is complex enough. I believe we really should cut down
on the distracting junk, especially if the same information is
repeated elsewhere.

It's done in 70-80%
https://github.com/mloskot/gil/tree/ml/includes-relative-to-boost-root-and-sorted

Best regards,
-- 
Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net