From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11163 invoked by alias); 16 Jan 2003 19:18:23 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 11145 invoked from network); 16 Jan 2003 19:18:17 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO gold.csi.cam.ac.uk) (131.111.8.12) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 16 Jan 2003 19:18:17 -0000 Received: from student.cusu.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.179.82] helo=kern.srcf.societies.cam.ac.uk ident=mail) by gold.csi.cam.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18ZFWq-0002dx-00 for gcc@gcc.gnu.org; Thu, 16 Jan 2003 19:18:16 +0000 Received: from jsm28 (helo=localhost) by kern.srcf.societies.cam.ac.uk with local-esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 18ZFWp-0007yL-00 for ; Thu, 16 Jan 2003 19:18:15 +0000 Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 20:03:00 -0000 From: "Joseph S. Myers" X-X-Sender: To: Subject: Re: Thoughts on doxygen for internal documentation In-Reply-To: <200301161720.h0GHK5J1009501@localhost.redhat.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-SW-Source: 2003-01/txt/msg00785.txt.bz2 On Thu, 16 Jan 2003 law@redhat.com wrote: > Actually, I wouldn't go with doxygen stuff at all unless it's been > OK'd for the rest of the compiler proper. I don't see a particular problem with doxygen to provide additional documentation (and cross-referencing, etc.) for internals, as long as the aim is still maintained that all the actual interfaces for authors of front ends and back ends (as opposed to details of internals at a lower level - for which documentation is still useful and for which doxygen may provide better structure than plain comments) should be documented in the internals manual proper (gccint.texi and files included from it). -- Joseph S. Myers jsm28@cam.ac.uk