tcottin wrote: I aggree, the separation of brief and details could be better. But:
One disadvantage of using the simple header approach for details is that we would rely on the user documentation to create the separation between brief and details. Meaning, only if the `\details` command is used, the separation can be done. And since the `\details` command does not have an effect in doxygen (except if it used to "terminate" a brief paragraph without an empty line) I can imagine that this command is not that commonly used and therefore I dont think we should generally rely on this. Instead of using the header approach for the `\details` command, I think the separation should be fixed by 1. Implement an automatic brief extraction as specified for the [doxygen setting JAVADOC_AUTOBRIEF==YES](https://www.doxygen.nl/manual/config.html#cfg_javadoc_autobrief). This way we always have a known separation between the brief description and the rest of the documentation (details). Currently the behaviour is like `JAVADOC_AUTOBRIEF==NO` and therefore this separation is not possible in case no `\brief` command was used. 2. Add a separate section for the detailed documentation the same way as for the return and paramater documentation. Under the new details section we can then add the detailed description we separated from the brief in step 1. Note: there already is a brief parser available in clang `clang/include/clang/AST/CommentBriefParser.h` but I think it is not generic enough to be used directly for clangd. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/156365 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
