Re: [cpp-netlib-devel] [RFC] Doxygen Policy

[Glyn M. <gly...@gm...>]

Dean,

2008/9/3 Dean Michael Berris <mik...@gm...>

> Hi Guys,
>
> I'm just thinking aloud here, but should we have explicit policies
> about the code/documentation quality?
>

Yeah, I agree.  I think its a bit broader than a doxygen policy.  Boost
itself does have some requirements:

http://www.boost.org/development/requirements.html#Documentation


> For instance, I have been remiss with inline documentation which makes
> it really hard to go back to the code and generate explicit
> relationships with existing tools. What would really help I think is
> if we started documenting each method/class/template with Doxygen
> comments.
>

This much seems only reasonable, I think.  The above link described exactly
what needs to be documented for each method/class/template.


>
> I'd like to hear your thoughts about the issue, and how you propose we
> go about with generating the documentation of the source code.


Boost.Asio has some scripts which generates generates HTML from doxygen
comments and converts it to boostbook.  Some headers and examples are
included in the documentation.

http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_36_0/doc/html/boost_asio/reference.html

I had envisioned having something similar to this for our project.

Glyn