Hi Dmitri,
Could you please let us know your opinion about C++ vs C-style doxygen 
comments. Read this thread for ‘pro’ and ‘con’ arguments about using C++ 
headers. Will LLVM online documentation look proper if we decide to use C-style 
headers? Which style do you personally prefer to see?

Note, that if there is any complaint in the future, it will take a couple of 
hours to write a python script to convert from C++ to C style doxygen comments.

Katya.

From: Eric Christopher [mailto:echri...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 24, 2016 6:40 PM
To: Romanova, Katya; reviews+d17550+public+bc8ce213fd9db...@reviews.llvm.org; 
Gao, Yunzhong; griboz...@gmail.com; craig.top...@gmail.com; Robinson, Paul
Cc: Bedwell, Greg; cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] D17550: Adding doxygen comments to the LLVM intrinsics 
(part 6, popcntintrin.h)

Those are all compelling reasons for me. Let's go with whatever you and Dmitri 
think would be best for now. :)

-eric

On Wed, Feb 24, 2016 at 12:41 PM Romanova, Katya 
<katya_roman...@playstation.sony.com<mailto:katya_roman...@playstation.sony.com>>
 wrote:
Hello,

I don’t think it will too hard to convert C++ style doxygen comments into C 
style doxygen comments by writing a post-processing python script. However, at 
first we need to decide if we really want to do that. If so, we need to settle 
on the exact format. After that, I need to make sure that the comments in the 
new format will be rendered correctly in MS Tooltips, XCode, online 
documentation and PS4 internal documentation. This discussion + investigation 
might take a few days.

Before we start discussing the exact format, I want to make sure that we really 
want to change to C-style doxygen comments.
Here are my not-so-strong arguments against it:

-        There currently are 257 occurrences C++ style comments in 14 other 
header files in /llvm/tools/clang/lib/Headers directory (I’m talking about the 
files that I didn’t touch). C++ style comments were there for AGES and nobody 
complained so far. If we decide to change C++ style doxygen comments -> 
C-style, we also need to change all regular C++ comments to C-style in these 
header files.

-        c99 (and later) supports C++ style comments, while I c89 doesn’t. I’m 
not sure if we have users that still use c89 format and x86 intrinsic headers 
at the same time.

-        C++ style doxygen comments are more pretty and readable compared to 
C-style comment (though it might be my subjective opinion).

Let me know what you think.

I will try to get Dmitri Gribenko’s opinion. He did a lot of work on doxygen in 
LLVM. I’m curious what he thinks about Javadoc style format.

Katya.


From: Eric Christopher [mailto:echri...@gmail.com<mailto:echri...@gmail.com>]
Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2016 10:51 PM
To: 
reviews+d17550+public+bc8ce213fd9db...@reviews.llvm.org<mailto:reviews%2bd17550%2bpublic%2bbc8ce213fd9db...@reviews.llvm.org>;
 Romanova, Katya; Gao, Yunzhong; 
griboz...@gmail.com<mailto:griboz...@gmail.com>; 
craig.top...@gmail.com<mailto:craig.top...@gmail.com>; Robinson, Paul
Cc: Bedwell, Greg; cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org<mailto:cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] D17550: Adding doxygen comments to the LLVM intrinsics 
(part 6, popcntintrin.h)


Yeah, we should be doing this. Nice catch Paul and Greg.

On Tue, Feb 23, 2016, 10:34 PM Greg Bedwell 
<greg_bedw...@sn.scee.net<mailto:greg_bedw...@sn.scee.net>> wrote:
gbedwell added a subscriber: gbedwell.
gbedwell added a comment.

In http://reviews.llvm.org/D17550#360177, @probinson wrote:

> One question I have, which shouldn't block this (as we've done several like 
> this already):
>  Is is okay to be using C++ style comments in these headers?
>  (Is there a C-style comment that Doxygen recognizes?)


There are a few various formats that Doxygen supports.  Looking at headers from 
llvm-c the most common convention appears to be JavaDoc style, although there 
are a few examples of other supported styles floating around the codebase.  
E.g. from include/llvm-c/lto.h using JavaDoc style:

/**

- Diagnostic handler type.
- \p severity defines the severity.
- \p diag is the actual diagnostic.
- The diagnostic is not prefixed by any of severity keyword, e.g., 'error: '.
- \p ctxt is used to pass the context set with the diagnostic handler. *
- \since LTO_API_VERSION=7 */

-Greg


Repository:
  rL LLVM

http://reviews.llvm.org/D17550

_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to