Search Results

Search found 124 results on 5 pages for 'doxygen addtogroup'.

Page 2/5 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5  | Next Page >

  • Optimal setup for Doxygen in a large multi-application COM project

    - by John
    A system has up to 100 VC++ projects, each spitting out a DLL or EXE. In addition there are many COM components with IDL and generated .h/.c files. What's 'the right way' or at least a good way to organise this with Doxygen? One overall doxy project or one per project/solution? And what's the right way to handle COM, which has generated code and a lot of 'fluff' that will bloat generated HTML files.

    Read the article

  • doxygen with IDL/ODL

    - by John
    If you have a C++ project that has a bunch of .ODL files and the generated .h files from the ODL compiler, should doxygen be told to parse both .odl and .h, or only one or the other? In general I don't like documenting generated code but IDL is sort of a special case. In any case, it seems like the member listing of ODL files is not quite working properly in my tests, are ODL files properly parsed?

    Read the article

  • Documenting functions in C++ with Doxygen

    - by Paul
    I've got a project that I'm using Doxygen to generate documentation to. The documentation of the classes is fine, but I've also got some functions that I use in main() to create objects etc. I'd also like to have these into my documentation, but I have not figured how to do that. Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Doxygen C++ comment string parser in python?

    - by Sebastian
    Does anybody know of a python module to parse a doxygen style C++ comment string? I mean a string like this (simple example): /** * A constructor. * A more elaborate description of the constructor. * @param param1 test1 * @param param2 test2 */ and I would like to extract the brief, the long description, the parameters, the return value etc. I'm currently doing this using string methods and regular expressions but my solution is not very robust. Alternatively does anybody know an easy to use parser lib that I can set up quickly? Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • Doxygen ignoring inherited functions, when class inherits privately but the functions declared publi

    - by MichaelM
    Sorry for long winded title, this makes a lot more sense with an example. Suppose we have a class A: class A { public: void someFunction(); void someOtherFunction(); }; And another class that privately inherits from A. However, we re-declare one of the inherited functions as public: class B : private A { public: A::someFunction; } When this code is processed by Doxygen, it does not recognise the public declaration of someFunction in class B. Instead, it shows someFunction as a privately inherited function. This is incorrect. Is anybody aware of how to fix this? Cheers

    Read the article

  • How to get Doxygen to recognize custom latex command

    - by Halpo
    Is there a way to use extra latex packages and/or extra latex commands with Doxygen code documentation system. For example I define the shortcut in a custom sty file. \newcommand{\tf}{\Theta_f} Then I use it about 300 time in the code, which is across about a dozen files. /*! Stochastic approximation of the latent response*/ void dual_bc_genw( //... double const * const psi, ///< \f$ \psi = B\tf \f$ //... ){/* lots of brilliant code */} But how do I get the system to recognize the extra package.

    Read the article

  • Doxygen comments on declarations or on definitions?

    - by Arkaitz Jimenez
    Just started using Doxygen for documenting my code here and can't decide where to put them. At first look it seems better to put them in the declaration files as it is there where you actually declare what you receive, what you are going to return and stuff like that, apart from that things like data members that are only in the declaration files can obviously only documented there. But often I find handier to comment methods in the implementation files as they are more accessible to me and the declaration file doesn't get cluttered with dozens of lines of comments making it harder to find what you look for when developing. What is your experience with that?

    Read the article

  • Doxygen C++ comment string parser in python?

    - by Sebastian
    Does anybody know of a python module to parse a doxygen style C++ comment string? I mean a string like this (simple example): /** * A constructor. * A more elaborate description of the constructor. * @param param1 test1 * @param param2 test2 */ and I would like to extract the brief, the long description, the parameters, the return value etc. I'm currently doing this using string methods and regular expressions but my solution is not very robust. Alternatively can anybody recommend an easy to use python parser lib that I can set up quickly? Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • Doxygen including methods twice doc files

    - by Maarek
    I'm having this issue where doxygen is adding the method twice in the documentation file. Is there a setting that stops auto-generation of documentation for methods within the .m file. For example in the documentation I'll see something like whats below where the first definition of + (Status *)registerUser is from the header XXXXXX.h file where the second is from XXXXXX.m. Header documentation : /** @brief Test Yada Yada @return <#(description)#> */ + (Status *)registerUser; Output: + (Status *) registerUser Test Yada Yada. Returns: <#(description)#> + (Status *) registerUser <#(brief description)#> <#(comprehensive description)#> registerUser Returns: <#(description)#> Definition at line 24 of file XXXXXX.m. Here are the build related configuration options. I've tried playing with them. EXTRACT_ALL with YES and NO... Hiding uncodumented Members and Classes. #--------------------------------------------------------------------------- # Build related configuration options #--------------------------------------------------------------------------- EXTRACT_ALL = NO EXTRACT_PRIVATE = NO EXTRACT_STATIC = NO EXTRACT_LOCAL_CLASSES = YES EXTRACT_LOCAL_METHODS = NO EXTRACT_ANON_NSPACES = NO HIDE_UNDOC_MEMBERS = YES HIDE_UNDOC_CLASSES = YES HIDE_FRIEND_COMPOUNDS = NO HIDE_IN_BODY_DOCS = NO INTERNAL_DOCS = NO CASE_SENSE_NAMES = NO HIDE_SCOPE_NAMES = NO SHOW_INCLUDE_FILES = YES FORCE_LOCAL_INCLUDES = NO INLINE_INFO = YES SORT_MEMBER_DOCS = YES SORT_BRIEF_DOCS = NO SORT_MEMBERS_CTORS_1ST = NO SORT_GROUP_NAMES = NO SORT_BY_SCOPE_NAME = NO

    Read the article

  • Any software to auto generate doxygen comment blocks?

    - by Simone Margaritelli
    Hello, i'm developing a quite big C++ software and now (better late than neve :)) i've decided to document it in the doxy standards. There are plenty of classes, methods, functions, macros and so on therefore i'm searching for a software that would scan my source tree and insert doxy comment blocks on top of every "documentable item" to let me edit them later and add details such as methods description and so on. Some hint?

    Read the article

  • Doxygen - <X>:1: warning: return type of member X is not documented

    - by Matt Clarkson
    /*! \var GLOBAL_VAR * \brief This is my global initialisation array for MY_STRUCT */ MY_STRUCT GLOBAL_VAR = { 1, 3, 2, 1, }; I get the following error: <GLOBAL_VAR>:1: warning: return type of member GLOBAL_VAR is not documented But this shouldn't have any return type?! If I do either of the following the warning goes away: /*! \var GLOBAL_VAR * \brief This is my global initialisation array for MY_STRUCT * \returns */ MY_STRUCT GLOBAL_VAR = { 1, 3, 2, 1, }; Or: /*! \var GLOBAL_VAR * \brief This is my global initialisation array for MY_STRUCT */ MY_STRUCT GLOBAL_VAR = 3; The isn't very useful as it puts a "Returns" into my HTML documentation and the second one breaks my code! How do I remove this warning? Thanks Matt

    Read the article

  • How do I minimize the number of changes between revisions with new doxygen output?

    - by Dirk Eddelbuettel
    A subversion repository contains the html, latex and man directories that doxygen generates from the source code. Even for small source code changes, new files are being generated with random names which makes for large changes in the version control system. Is there are way around this? How can I minimize the changesets between revisions while still including doxygen-generated documentation? Alternatively, how could I find which of the doxygen-genrated files are no longer being used and should be removed?

    Read the article

  • How can I force Doxygen to show full include path?

    - by Artyom
    How can I force Doxygen to show full include path? What do I mean: I have a class foo::bar::bee defined in bee.hpp in following directory structure: foo foo/bar foo/bar/bee.hpp Doxygen, when it documents foo::bar::bee class tells that you need to include <bee.hpp>, but for my software I need <foo/bar/bee.hpp> How can I cause Doxygen to do this? Notes: FULL_PATH_NAMES is already set to default YES I do not want to provide include header explicitly for each class, because there too many of them. I want Doxygen to do this automatically. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Is it possible to change names of Doxygen generated html files?

    - by Dmitriy
    We are going to publish API documentation on our web site. The documentation is generated by Doxygen from sources. The problem is that Doxygen generate weird file names (which is no so good for SEO). For example, for source file RO4_Languages.h Doxygen generate _r_o4___languages_8h.htm. Is it possible to change name of generated files? PS: I know that it possible to change output using 3rd party tools/scripts (awk/sed/perl/etc).

    Read the article

  • How can I keep doxygen from documenting #defines in a C file?

    - by Chris Nelson
    I have #define values in headers that I certainly want Doxygen to document but I have others in C files that I treat as static constants and I don't want Doxygen to document them. Something as simple and stupid as #define NUMBER_OF(a) (sizeof((a))/sizeof((a)[0])) #define MSTR(e) #e How can I keep Doxygen from putting those #defines in the documentation it creates? I've tried marking it with @internal but that didn't seem to help. A somewhat-related question on Doxygen and #define, how can I get: #define SOME_CONSTANT 1234 /**< An explanation */ to put "SOME_CONSTANT" and "An explanation" but not "1234" in the output?

    Read the article

  • Template or function arguments as implementation details in doxygen?

    - by Vincent
    In doxygen is there any common way to specify that some C++ template parameters of function parameters are implementation details and should not be specified by the user ? For example, a template parameter used as recursion level counter in metaprogramming technique or a SFINAE parameter in a function ? For example : /// \brief Do something /// \tparam MyFlag A flag... /// \tparam Limit Recursion limit /// \tparam Current Recursion level counter. SHOULD NOT BE EXPLICITELY SPECIFIED !!! template<bool MyFlag, unsigned int Limit, unsigned int Current = 0> myFunction(); Is there any doxygen normalized option equivalent to "SHOULD NOT BE EXPLICITELY SPECIFIED !!!" ?

    Read the article

  • C++: Declaration of template class member specialization (+ Doxygen bonus question!)

    - by Ziv
    When I specialize a (static) member function/constant in a template class, I'm confused as to where the declaration is meant to go. Here's an example of what I what to do - yoinked directly from IBM's reference on template specialization: template<class T> class X { public: static T v; static void f(T); }; template<class T> T X<T>::v = 0; template<class T> void X<T>::f(T arg) { v = arg; } template<> char* X<char*>::v = "Hello"; template<> void X<float>::f(float arg) { v = arg * 2; } int main() { X<char*> a, b; X<float> c; c.f(10); // X<float>::v now set to 20 } The question is, how do I divide this into header/cpp files? The generic implementation is obviously in the header, but what about the specialization? It can't go in the header file, because it's concrete, leading to multiple definition. But if it goes into the .cpp file, is code which calls X::f() aware of the specialization, or might it rely on the generic X::f()? So far I've got the specialization in the .cpp only, with no declaration in the header. I'm not having trouble compiling or even running my code (on gcc, don't remember the version at the moment), and it behaves as expected - recognizing the specialization. But A) I'm not sure this is correct, and I'd like to know what is, and B) my Doxygen documentation comes out wonky and very misleading (more on that in a moment). What seems most natural to me would be something like this, declaring the specialization in the header and defining it in the .cpp: ===XClass.hpp=== #ifndef XCLASS_HPP #define XCLASS_HPP template<class T> class X { public: static T v; static void f(T); }; template<class T> T X<T>::v = 0; template<class T> void X<T>::f(T arg) { v = arg; } /* declaration of specialized functions */ template<> char* X<char*>::v; template<> void X<float>::f(float arg); #endif ===XClass.cpp=== #include <XClass.hpp> /* concrete implementation of specialized functions */ template<> char* X<char*>::v = "Hello"; template<> void X<float>::f(float arg) { v = arg * 2; } ...but I have no idea if this is correct. The most immediate consequence of this issue, as I mentioned, is my Doxygen documentation, which doesn't seem to warm to the idea of member specialization, at least the way I'm defining it at the moment. It will always present only the first definition it finds of a function/constant, and I really need to be able to present the specializations as well. If I go so far as to re-declare the entire class, i.e. in the header: /* template declaration */ template<class T> class X { public: static T v; static void f(T); }; /* template member definition */ template<class T> T X<T>::v = 0; template<class T> void X<T>::f(T arg) { v = arg; } /* declaration of specialized CLASS (with definitions in .cpp) */ template<> class X<float> { public: static float v; static void f(float); }; then it will display the different variations of X as different classes (which is fine by me), but I don't know how to get the same effect when specializing only a few select members of the class. I don't know if this is a mistake of mine, or a limitation of Doxygen - any ideas? Thanks much, Ziv

    Read the article

  • Documentation for Qt documentation comments? Qt + Doxygen?

    - by Jake Petroules
    Where can I find documentation for Qt documentation comments? I'm referring to how Qt uses a specific style for documentation comments, like so: /*! \class MyClassName \brief The MyClassName class is used as an example on Stack Overflow. This class serves a few functions, the most important being: \list \i So people can understand my question. \i So people can have a few laughs at the comedy in my example. \endlist */ ...you get the picture. So where can I find information about all the switches, like \class, \list, \brief, etc. Also, what tool(s) do I use to generate documentation files from these comments in my source files? Does Doxygen support this syntax?

    Read the article

  • use file or class for documenting classes in doxygen?

    - by AlejandroVK
    Hi all, This surely is a noob question, but I can't find an answer in Doxygen documentation. I'm not sure whether using: @file or @class when documenting my header files. The reason is that if I put file, then all the comments appear in the Files tab only, but not in the Classes tab (per each). For cpp it's ok, I just use file and it's good, but if I use both file and class in the header (file at the beginning and class right before the start of the class declaration) then I get duplicated entries for the class in the generated documentation... What I'm doing wrong? Any suggestions? Ideas? Regards, Alex

    Read the article

  • How do I remove line references in generate output in doxygen?

    - by MeThinks
    I want to remove lines look as follows but I still want to return source code browsing Definition at line 377 of file xxx.h. I have tried the following two in the doxygen config file but these just remove cross references on types # If the REFERENCES_RELATION tag is set to YES # then for each documented function all documented entities # called/used by that function will be listed. REFERENCES_RELATION = NO # If the REFERENCES_LINK_SOURCE tag is set to YES (the default) # and SOURCE_BROWSER tag is set to YES, then the hyperlinks from # functions in REFERENCES_RELATION and REFERENCED_BY_RELATION lists will # link to the source code. Otherwise they will link to the documentation. REFERENCES_LINK_SOURCE = NO update: I've just trying setting the following and seems to do the jobs but waiting to confirm if this is the correct way of achieving what I want SOURCE_BROWSER = NO

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5  | Next Page >