Re: [Doxygen-develop] Bug in 1.4.0?

[Dimitri v. H. <di...@st...>]

On Mon, Jan 03, 2005 at 11:20:51PM -0600, Dan Gass wrote:
> On Mon, 3 Jan 2005 14:19:25 -0800, Cadle, Brad <bc...@ar...> wrote:
> > I noticed that in moving from version 1.3.9.1 to 1.4.0 the behavior of the \todo command seems have been broken:
> > 
> > in 1.3.9.1 all the /todo commands for a single C function are grouped under a single heading in the file reference.
> > 
> > In 1.4.0 Each /todo command in the file reference for a single function results in a separate heading in the file reference.
> > 
> > Example:
> > 
> >    /** \todo Fill out function. */
> > 
> >    /** \req Complies with requirement squiggy */
> > 
> >    /** \ps Test Psuedo Code line 1 \endps */
> > 
> >    /** \todo Remove ret = 1. *
> > 
> > (NOTE: /ps is an alias I defined)
> > 
> > 1.3.9.1, I get for the file reference
> > 
> > Todo:
> >     Fill out function.
> > 
> >     Remove ret = 1.
> > 
> > Requirements:
> >     Complies with requirement squiggy
> > 
> > Pseudo Code:
> >     Test Psuedo Code line 1
> > 
> > 1.4.0, I get for the file reference
> > 
> > Todo:
> >     Fill out function.
> > 
> > Requirements:
> >     Complies with requirement squiggy
> > 
> > Pseudo Code:
> >     Test Psuedo Code line 1
> > 
> > Todo:
> >     Remove ret = 1.
> > 
> > Clearly, 1.3.9.1 is desirable.
> > 
> 
> This may be a result of a bug fix (id 157485) I'll let Dimitri comment
> further.
> 

As Dan mentioned, this was the result of some people (Dan was one of them)
reporting that the order in which they placed their commands was not 
maintained. I think there is something to say for that as well
(especially since the same is not done for other commands such as @warning).
So I think it not so clear that the pre-1.4.0 behaviour was better.

Regards,
  Dimitri