Topic: Does exist any standardized way for documenting C++ source code?
Author: elviin@gmail.com
Date: 22 Jun 2005 15:00:04 GMT Raw View
Does exist any standardized way for documenting C++ source code? Is
doxygen something to consider as a good documenting practice?
---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu ]
[ --- Please see the FAQ before posting. --- ]
[ FAQ: http://www.jamesd.demon.co.uk/csc/faq.html ]
Author: dsp@bdal.de (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Daniel_Kr=FCgler?=)
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 15:06:40 GMT Raw View
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D MODERATOR'S COMMENT:=20
Let's keep this discussion closer to the charter (what does or should
the standard say, and why), and not go into a review of documentation too=
ls.
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D END OF MODERATOR'S COMMENT
Hello elviin,
elviin@gmail.com wrote:
> Does exist any standardized way for documenting C++ source code? Is
> doxygen something to consider as a good documenting practice?
I don't know what you mean by "standardized", but we indeed use
doxygen as source documentation tool, after having bad experiences
with others (both commercial and free, AFAIK). Doxygen is easy to
use and actually provides everything I need for proper documentation.
Greetings from Bremen,
Daniel Kr=FCgler
---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu ]
[ --- Please see the FAQ before posting. --- ]
[ FAQ: http://www.jamesd.demon.co.uk/csc/faq.html ]
Author: kanze@gabi-soft.fr
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 10:34:05 CST Raw View
elviin@gmail.com wrote:
> Does exist any standardized way for documenting C++ source
> code?
Not within the framework of the ISO C++ standard (which is the
topic of this group).
> Is doxygen something to consider as a good documenting
> practice?
It think its pretty close to being a de facto standard. If only
because it allows so many variants that it doesn't enforce a
particular documentation practice.
--
James Kanze GABI Software
Conseils en informatique orient e objet/
Beratung in objektorientierter Datenverarbeitung
9 place S mard, 78210 St.-Cyr-l' cole, France, +33 (0)1 30 23 00 34
---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu ]
[ --- Please see the FAQ before posting. --- ]
[ FAQ: http://www.jamesd.demon.co.uk/csc/faq.html ]
Author: David Abrahams <dave@boost-consulting.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 11:16:14 CST Raw View
===================================== MODERATOR'S COMMENT:
Let's keep this discussion closer to the charter (what does or should
the standard say, and why), and not go into a review of documentation tools.
===================================== END OF MODERATOR'S COMMENT
elviin@gmail.com writes:
> Does exist any standardized way for documenting C++ source code?
You might look at http://www.boost.org/more/writingdoc/index.html,
which tries to follow the C++ standard conventions. Be warned,
however, that it's pretty easy to come up with something that's
formally correct but hard for the uninitiated to read (like the C++
standard ;->).
--
Dave Abrahams
Boost Consulting
www.boost-consulting.com
---
[ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles, try just posting with ]
[ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu ]
[ --- Please see the FAQ before posting. --- ]
[ FAQ: http://www.jamesd.demon.co.uk/csc/faq.html ]