I think it sounds like a good idea; especially for encouraging new developers to start working on the code base.
-- Sam On 7/14/07, Michael Casadevall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 16:07:23 -0400 (EDT) From: Michael Casadevall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Doxygening Mach and Hurd During my time correcting the entropy patch to meet the requirements to be accepted, I noticved the coding style would make it extremely easy to doxyify the codebase. For those of you unfamilar with Doxygen, its similar to Javadoc and other solutions that use markup in the code base to generate documentation. I believe one of the bigger problems with mach, and especially getting new developers is that mach itself is fairly undocumented, especially its internals (the only real documentation of IPC I know if is Thomas' guide). I think it would be in the projects best interests if we start doxyifing the codebase (which is fairly easy to do; I learned how to use use doxygen in about five minutes the first time I ever used it). Any thoughts and comments on doxygening the codebase? Michael _______________________________________________ Bug-hurd mailing list Bug-hurd@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
_______________________________________________ Bug-hurd mailing list Bug-hurd@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-hurd
