Re: [Doxygen-users] Class graphs across namespaces

[Dimitri v. H. <do...@gm...>]

Your example should work fine, doxygen should have no problem matching AA t=
o
CC in your example.

So as Nick suggested: if you think you found a bug
please report a self-contained example to the bug tracker.

Regards,
  Dimitri

On 2/6/06, Matt Davies <mat...@ro...> wrote:
>
> Anybody?  Please...  Dimitri, can you tell me if this is a bug, or
> missing feature, in doxygen or something that I am not doing correct?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dox...@li...
> [mailto:dox...@li...] On Behalf Of Matt
> Davies
> Sent: 01 February 2006 10:18
> To: dox...@li...
> Subject: RE: [Doxygen-users] Class graphs across namespaces
>
> That's ok, and I understand - I actually did post some sample code that
> will reproduce the results:
>
> namespace N
> {
>         class AA
>         {
>         };
>
>         class BB: public AA
>         {
>         };
> }
>
> class CC: public N::AA
> {
> };
>
>
> That will produce a graph that links BB with AA, but not CC with AA as
> you expect it should.  It may be a setting in the configuration but at
> the moment I cannot get classes to show a link to other classes in
> different namespaces.  This is rather important to me as I tend to put
> code for different libraries in different namespaces (e.g. namespaces
> 'core' and 'engine').
>
> I was wondering if any other C++ programmer had similar difficulties.
>
> Many thanks
> /Matt
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Nick MacDonald [mailto:nic...@gm...]
> Sent: 01 February 2006 02:05
> To: Matt Davies
> Subject: Re: [Doxygen-users] Class graphs across namespaces
>
> Matt:
>
> Unfortunately I am not experienced in the areas you need answers, as I
> only use Doxygen with C code.  Accordingly I can be of little help,
> except to suggest that you try posting actual sample code that
> reproduces your issue.  With any luck, the problem is one of general
> laziness, and if its easy to play with an example maybe someone will
> take an interest and get back to you...
>
> Sorry I couldn't be any more helpful.
>
> On 1/31/06, Matt Davies <mat...@ro...> wrote:
> > With the lack of reply, am I to assume that this is a feature (or a
> bug)?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>