doxygen-users

RE: [Doxygen-users] TODO Lists in CPP implementation files

[Prikryl,Petr <PRI...@sk...>]

Hi Allan,

In your example, your \todo command is used inside
the function body.  Doxygen ignores comments inside
the function bodies these days.  So, the reason is not
because the \todo command is in cpp. It's because
it is inside the function body.  Try to put it just in front
of your main().

Regards,
  Petr

> Is there any way to get Doxygen to consider both 
> the .h and .cpp files when
> building its to-do list?  As an example, the code below
> contains \todo commands in both test.h and test.cpp.
>[...]
> int main (int argc, char* argv)
> {
>   TestClass myTestClass;
>   std::cout << myTestClass.GetValue() << std::endl;
>   std::cout << myTestClass.GetAnotherValue() << std::endl;
> 
>   /// \todo DOXYGEN DOESN'T PICK THIS ITEM UP!
> 
> };

-- 
Petr Prikryl, Skil, spol. s r.o., (pri...@sk...)

RE: [Doxygen-users] TODO Lists in CPP implementation files

[Prikryl,Petr <PRI...@sk...>]

Hi Victor, 

I partly agree with you.  It really would be a bit more useful 
if you could put \todo to the exact point of the code.  
On the other hand, this would require reimplementation 
of the doxygen's mechanism for working with comments.
Dimitri has some plans for future, but apparently, this is not 
on the top of the preference list now.

Just to avoid some misunderstanding, the \todo's need
not to be placed in front of the main() function (this was
written in the context of the given example).  It can be placed
in front of any function or a member function.  They usually
tend to have quite short bodies if the architecture of the 
application is good.  This way, the \todo points quite well
to the place in sources.

In our project, the todo list (if printed) has about 40 pages.
I don't say if it is good or not.  But definitely, the exact 
placement of these \todo items is not the big problem here.
Knowing the related class and the method is just enough.

Regards, 
  Petr

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Wagner, Victor [SMTP:VW...@se...]
> Sent:	Friday, November 30, 2001 3:34 PM
> To:	Prikryl,Petr
> Subject:	RE: [Doxygen-users] TODO Lists in CPP implementation files
> 
> IMO, in order for \todo to be 'really useful' you need to be able to put
> them anywhere in the file.
> They are not just notes that "something" needs to be done, they are also
> markers as to WHERE this "something" needs to be done.
> in front of main() (most of my files don't have a main()) is about as
> useful
> as a bug report "doesn't work".
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Prikryl,Petr [mailto:PRI...@sk...]
> Sent: Friday, 2001 November 30 02:07
> To: dox...@li...
> Subject: RE: [Doxygen-users] TODO Lists in CPP implementation files
> 
> 
> Hi Allan,
> 
> In your example, your \todo command is used inside
> the function body.  Doxygen ignores comments inside
> the function bodies these days.  So, the reason is not
> because the \todo command is in cpp. It's because
> it is inside the function body.  Try to put it just in front
> of your main().
> 
> Regards,
>   Petr

Re: [Doxygen-users] TODO Lists in CPP implementation files

[Rod O. <oll...@SE...>]

These produce the same results.  The second has the comment in the function
body.  However, only one ( @fn ) per function will work.


////////////////////////////// 1 /////////////////////////////////////////////

/**
 * @todo change result constants to stcl constants
 */
void sedsystems::grm::simlrm::SimLrmComponent::
setAutoMode( bool autoMode, USTR_String *result)
{
    UDBG_TRACE( "SimLrmComponent::setAutoMode" );

    _autoMode = autoMode;

    *result = sedsystems::sim_fwk::stcl::SUCCESS_RESULT;

}

/////////////////////////////// 2 ////////////////////////////////////////////

void sedsystems::grm::simlrm::SimLrmComponent::
setAutoMode( bool autoMode, USTR_String *result)
{
    UDBG_TRACE( "SimLrmComponent::setAutoMode" );

    _autoMode = autoMode;

/**
 * @fn void sedsystems::grm::simlrm::SimLrmComponent::setAutoMode( bool
autoMode, USTR_String *result)
 * @todo change result constants to stcl constants
 */
    *result = sedsystems::sim_fwk::stcl::SUCCESS_RESULT;

}


"Prikryl,Petr" wrote:

> Hi Victor,
>
> I partly agree with you.  It really would be a bit more useful
> if you could put \todo to the exact point of the code.
> On the other hand, this would require reimplementation
> of the doxygen's mechanism for working with comments.
> Dimitri has some plans for future, but apparently, this is not
> on the top of the preference list now.
>
> Just to avoid some misunderstanding, the \todo's need
> not to be placed in front of the main() function (this was
> written in the context of the given example).  It can be placed
> in front of any function or a member function.  They usually
> tend to have quite short bodies if the architecture of the
> application is good.  This way, the \todo points quite well
> to the place in sources.
>
> In our project, the todo list (if printed) has about 40 pages.
> I don't say if it is good or not.  But definitely, the exact
> placement of these \todo items is not the big problem here.
> Knowing the related class and the method is just enough.
>
> Regards,
>   Petr
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Wagner, Victor [SMTP:VW...@se...]
> > Sent: Friday, November 30, 2001 3:34 PM
> > To:   Prikryl,Petr
> > Subject:      RE: [Doxygen-users] TODO Lists in CPP implementation files
> >
> > IMO, in order for \todo to be 'really useful' you need to be able to put
> > them anywhere in the file.
> > They are not just notes that "something" needs to be done, they are also
> > markers as to WHERE this "something" needs to be done.
> > in front of main() (most of my files don't have a main()) is about as
> > useful
> > as a bug report "doesn't work".
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Prikryl,Petr [mailto:PRI...@sk...]
> > Sent: Friday, 2001 November 30 02:07
> > To: dox...@li...
> > Subject: RE: [Doxygen-users] TODO Lists in CPP implementation files
> >
> >
> > Hi Allan,
> >
> > In your example, your \todo command is used inside
> > the function body.  Doxygen ignores comments inside
> > the function bodies these days.  So, the reason is not
> > because the \todo command is in cpp. It's because
> > it is inside the function body.  Try to put it just in front
> > of your main().
> >
> > Regards,
> >   Petr
>
> _______________________________________________
> Doxygen-users mailing list
> Dox...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/doxygen-users