Re: [Doxygen-users] two problems with Fortran interfaces

[Alfredo B. <alf...@en...>]

Dear Oleg,
thanks for the very detailed answers to my questions. Everything you
say makes a lot of sense. The little trick of using ::suba and ::subb
is a nice solution to my second problem and, as you suggest, I believe
it should be done automatically, although I realize it may be
difficult to do it (if possible at all).

Best regards

Alfredo




On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 12:51 PM, Oleg Batrashev <og...@gm...> wrote:
> Hi Alfredo,
>
>> The optput of Doxygen on these two files has two major problems:
>>
>> 1) the "sub" generic interface appears in the Data Types List which is
>> obviously wrong
>
> Fortran extension is based on what is available in Doxygen from C and
> C++ . There is no direct analogue for Fortran interfaces, so it was
> chosen to use Sections::CLASS_SEC with ClassSpecifier::Interface. This
> places the interface into Data Type List as if it was C/C++ class and
> marks it as "interface" on its documentation page.
>
> This is an old issue: https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=521859
>
>> 2) all the hyperlinks to "suba" and "subb" in the pages related to the
>> module or the interface should bring to the definition of those
>> routines into the sub.f90 file but instead the are directed to some
>> place inside submod.f90.
> Everywhere outside the interface (documentation) it does link to those
> subroutines. If you want to link to those subroutines inside the
> interface use ::suba and ::subb.
> May be it should be done automatically but not sure.
>
> See also latest changes to Fortran interfaces in Doxygen
> https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=637610
>
> Oleg



-- 
-----------------------------------------
Alfredo Buttari, PhD
CNRS-IRIT
2 rue Camichel, 31071 Toulouse, France
http://buttari.perso.enseeiht.fr