Re: [Audacity-devel] doxygen
A free multi-track audio editor and recorder
Brought to you by:
aosiniao
From: Steve J. <st...@jo...> - 2002-07-05 19:02:51
|
Seconded! Actually, doxygen dies horribly for me right now... any chance you could post your Doxyfile somewhere, Joshua? (eg cvs? :-) ) Windows support is fine, btw. See http://doxbar.sourceforge.net for a convenient DevStudio doxygen toolbar, and http://www.stack.nl/~dimitri/doxygen/download.html#helpers for a general list of helper tools (not just for Windows). Steve At 18:08 30/06/2002 -0700, you wrote: >I propose that we that we rubber stamp your proposal :) > >Augustus > >Joshua Haberman wrote: > >>This period of redesign as libaudacity is separated out strikes me as a >>perfect time to start using doxygen for generating documentation out of >>inline comments in the source. I'm excited about this and I plan to >>start documenting the new classes Dominic is writing as they are >>committed. >> >>Doxygen gives you a few choices of how to specify what comments it should >>notice and parse. I think we ought to decide on one so that the source >>is consistent. >> >>Choice 1: (JavaDoc style) >> >>/** >>* (...text...) >>*/ >> >>I like this choice perfectly well. >> >>Choice 2: (Qt style) >> >>/*! >>* (...text...) >>*/ >> >>I hate this one. The bang just doesn't do it for me. >> >>Choice 3: (C++-ish style): >> >>/// >>/// (...text...) >>/// >> >>Which I don't mind, but I like JavaDoc style better. >> >>or >> >>//! >>//! (...text...) >>//! >> >>Which is bang-ugliness again. >> >>The other main choice you get to make is whether to use \ or @ to escape >>keywords. Personally I like the @ better. >> >>Lastly, each symbol can have a brief and a detailed description. I think >>a good method would be to put the brief description in the header file, >>and the detailed description in the cpp file, closer to the code where it >>is less likely to go out of date. >> >>I'm hoping you will just rubber stamp my preferences at which point I can >>begin documenting, but if you have violent opposition I understand. :-) >> >>Josh |