Morten Eriksen <mo...@si...> writes:
> I wondering if it's possible to configure Doxygen to _not_ repeat
> the documentation on C++ inherited members of subclasses?
Replying to my own post here... anyway, I had a problem described like
this:
> IMHO, this feature tends to clutter up the API documentation more
> than it clarifies -- at least for the particular class library I'm
> documenting.
>
> An example to make myself clear:
>
> ----8<--- [snip] ---------8<--- [snip] ---------8<--- [snip] -----
>
> //! This class blablabla...
> class Super {
> public:
> //! This method blablabla...
> virtual void aVirtualMethod(void);
> };
>
> //! This class blablabla...
> class Sub : class Super {
> public:
> virtual void aVirtualMethod(void);
> };
>
> ----8<--- [snip] ---------8<--- [snip] ---------8<--- [snip] -----
>
> Now, for class Sub, aVirtualMethod() will be included in the
> documentation, just repeating the documentation of this method in
> the Super class. I would like to avoid that, to "clean up" and
> remove unnecessary clutter in a huge, fine-grained class library I
> have documented here.
..and another problem described like this:
> [...] is it possible to configure Doxygen to not output
> non-documented default constructors and destructors of a C++ class?
>
> The documentation for default constructors usually just ends up as
>
> //! Default constructor.
> MyClass::MyClass(void) { [...] }
>
> or
>
> //! Default constructor, initializes internal member variables.
> MyClass::MyClass(void) { [...] }
>
> and for the destructor
>
> //! Destructor, deallocates resources used by class instance.
> MyClass::~MyClass() { [...] }
>
> ..or something in this vein -- which of course is completely worthless
> to the application programmer, so it could just as well have been left
> out. *Not* documenting the default constructors and/or the destructor
> could be sufficient clue to Doxygen to don't bother with them for the
> output.
>
> So, is there currently any way to leave out un-documented default
> constructors and destructors?
(Sorry for the lengthy quoting, I just wanted to rehash the problems
for the developers, as the mails were sent to the -users list.)
Now, I have a patch done by a colleague (Kristian Eide) which fixes
both problems, so please consider the following for inclusion (done
against the code of the 1.2.17 release):
----8<--- [snip] --------8<--- [snip] --------8<--- [snip] ----8<----
--- memberdef.cpp Wed Jun 26 19:16:23 2002
+++ ../../doxygen-1.2.17/src/memberdef.cpp Mon Aug 12 12:11:13 2002
@@ -581,8 +581,33 @@
mtype==Friend
);
+ // hide member if it overrides a member in a superclass and has no
+ // documentation
+ bool visibleIfDocVirtual = (reimplements() == NULL ||
+ hasDocumentation()
+ );
+
+ // true if this member is a constructor or destructor
+ // This should perhaps be included in the MemberDef class
+ bool cOrDTor = (name()==classDef->localName() || // constructor
+ (name().find('~')!=-1 && // hack to detect destructor
+ name().find("operator")==-1
+ )
+ );
+
+ // hide default constructors or destructors (no args) without
+ // documentation
+ bool visibleIfNotDefaultCDTor = !(cOrDTor &&
+ defArgList != NULL &&
+ (defArgList->isEmpty() ||
+ defArgList->first()->type == "void"
+ ) &&
+ !hasDocumentation()
+ );
+
bool visible = visibleIfStatic && visibleIfDocumented &&
- visibleIfEnabled && visibleIfPrivate && !annScope;
+ visibleIfEnabled && visibleIfPrivate &&
+ visibleIfDocVirtual && visibleIfNotDefaultCDTor && !annScope;
//printf("MemberDef::isBriefSectionVisible() %d\n",visible);
return visible;
}
----8<--- [snip] --------8<--- [snip] --------8<--- [snip] ----8<----
Best regards,
Morten
|
