[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > Hello list, > > Has anyone considered to apply Doxygen to the LilyPond sources? I'm aware > that the internal comments are not doxygen'erated, however, Doxygen is > capable to analyze plain C/C++ codes and to generate at least rudimentary > "documentation" in various output formats. > > One of the major advantages is the creation of graphical displays of specific > aspects of a bundle of source codes, e.g., class hierarchy, class graphs, and > include/included-by graphs. With the tool doxywizard (1.3.9) I have created > a rudimentary "Doxyfile" and run Doxygen over the CVS content of current > LilyPond. This definition file is attached to this submission for those who > would like to apply Doxygen themselves. > > Now, when I click through the HTML "documentation" and look at the images of > the include graphs, I find that many "#include" directives are redundant, > i.e., define transitive connections between header a/o source files (plus at > least one cyclic dependency between "flower/include/string.hh" and > "flower/include/international.hh"). It is common knowledge (John Lakos and > other experts come to mind) that the #include hierarchy can be an important > backbone of a C/C++ software system as well as an elementary entry point to > understanding such a system.
I've added the Doxygen file to CVS. I'm willing to add doxygen rules to the makefile, if someone writes them. -- Han-Wen Nienhuys | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
