RE: [Doxygen-users] Re: Documenting enums of an IDL file

[Don M. <dmc...@in...>]

[Don McClimans]
> Doxygen does not lump the propget and
> propput signatures into one "property" in the documentation,
> which makes the generated documentation confusing, and is annoying if you
> only want to write the documentation once and have it apply to both get
and put
> (no way to do that).

[Glenn Maxey]
>If you defined groups (@defgroup) and assigned groups (@ingroup) to the
appropriate
>code items as part of the doxygen comment blocks, you might get better
control over
>what things appear together. You can go beyond organization by file or by
code, to an
>organization by higher concepts defined by your application.

[Don]
Well, we already use groups to separate the "methods" from the "properties".
You can't nest groups, unfortunately, so we can't then group each property
get and put function.

You can do things like this, but it's not really satisfactory, in my opinion
at least. I did experiment with using grouping to place the put and get
functions together. But if every property is a separate group, the
formatting looks ugly, because a "group" is meant to cover more than two
essentially identical functions. What I would really like for IDL properties
would be *one* signature to come out of Doxygen, that covers both get and
put. If there's no "put" function, you would mark the property as
"read-only".

I have considered pre-processing our IDL into pseudo-C++, so that we might
get something like this. But I haven't done it (yet). :)

Don