[openbeos] Re: doxygen basics
- From: "Jean Schwerer" <j-schwerer@xxxxxxx>
- To: openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 23:54:09 +0100
"Erik Jakowatz" <erik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>I'm really torn on this subject, so much so that it's been sort of
>holding some things up for my team. =( I *really* like the idea of
>embedding our documentation in the source -- to me this seems key to any
>hope of keeping the docs up-to-date. And, echoing what Michael said, I
>*really* like the free-beer nature of doxygen.
>
>Unfortunately, I have to break ranks with what other people are
>expressing and say that I *hate* it's output. And I do mean *hate*. I
>honestly don't think I could construct a more context-free way to
>organize documentation -- the strict hierarchy in the standard output
>serves to chop everything into little pieces that are hard to relate to
>each other. I personally really like the BeBook's format -- not the
>flash, but the overall scheme of organization. You can almost read the
>docs straight through from start to finish like a text book!
etc.
I wholeheartidly agree. I like the doxygen concept but hate the output. If we
output the default
way I think I'd rather read the doc right from the source code files than
through doxygen.
Jean
Other related posts:
