Re: [Libreoffice] Doxygen for C/C++ URE Documentation

On 01/04/2012 03:30 PM, Stephan Bergmann wrote: With autodoc no longer used to document C++, the next step would be to either replace its use to generate IDL docu as well (and completely remove autodoc), or at least remove the C++-specific autodoc code. The SDK includes the autodoc executable, bu

[Libreoffice] Doxygen for IDL? (was: Doxygen for C/C++ URE Documentation)

On 01/06/2012 12:12 PM, Stephan Bergmann wrote: Yeah, next step I plan to do is get rid of autodoc for IDL, too (after this topic has finally been "forced upon" me via URE gbuildification), and then rid the code base from all that nonsense in one step. Just a quick update on this rather low-pri

Re: [Libreoffice] Doxygen for C/C++ URE Documentation

Le 09/01/12 17:42, Christian Lohmaier a écrit : Hi Christian, > No, you misunderstood. You don't need to install doxygen if you only > want to provide extensions. > > If you want to build & offer the LO SDK itself for download, then (and > only then) you need it. > Ah, OK, sorry, I was a bit c

Re: [Libreoffice] Doxygen for C/C++ URE Documentation

Le 09/01/12 17:40, Norbert Thiebaud a écrit : Hi Norbert, > FYI: > > binary of doxygen for acOSX are available here: > http://www.stack.nl/~dimitri/doxygen/download.html#latestsrc > > after install (assuming a standard drag-and-drop in Applications) > sudo ln -s /Applications/Doxygen.app/Conten

Re: [Libreoffice] Doxygen for C/C++ URE Documentation

Hi Alexander, *, On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 5:17 PM, Alexander Thurgood wrote: > > Thanks for that information. If I understand correctly, it means that if > I want to keep on distributing the mysql connector extension on the > extensions site with any associated documentation, then I need to > insta

Re: [Libreoffice] Doxygen for C/C++ URE Documentation

FYI: binary of doxygen for acOSX are available here: http://www.stack.nl/~dimitri/doxygen/download.html#latestsrc after install (assuming a standard drag-and-drop in Applications) sudo ln -s /Applications/Doxygen.app/Contents/Reources/doxygen /usr/local/bin/doxygen and you're all set :-) Norber

Re: [Libreoffice] Doxygen for C/C++ URE Documentation

Hi Christian, Le 09/01/12 16:34, Christian Lohmaier a écrit : > Yes, and that's why I wrote it is required for release-builds. But > unless you publish your LibreOffice SDK/ODK package for download, then > you are free to build the ODK without generated documentation. So when > you build you can:

Re: [Libreoffice] Doxygen for C/C++ URE Documentation

On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 4:12 PM, Alexander Thurgood wrote: > Le 09/01/12 15:51, Christian Lohmaier a écrit : > > Hi Christian, > >> >> It is only required if you want to build the documentation from the >> source-files. So for release-builds: yes, it is required. For the >> casual developer: No, no

Re: [Libreoffice] Doxygen for C/C++ URE Documentation

On 01/09/2012 04:12 PM, Alexander Thurgood wrote: Ah, thanks for that, most useful, but doesn't the SDK need to be built if you are building extensions, or am I conufusing that with the ODK ? The names "SDK," "ODK," and "UDK" are used somewhat interchangeably. But the SDK is not needed to buil

Re: [Libreoffice] Doxygen for C/C++ URE Documentation

Le 09/01/12 15:51, Christian Lohmaier a écrit : Hi Christian, > > It is only required if you want to build the documentation from the > source-files. So for release-builds: yes, it is required. For the > casual developer: No, not required, and you don't usually build the > SDK in that case at al

Re: [Libreoffice] Doxygen for C/C++ URE Documentation

Hi *, On Mon, Jan 9, 2012 at 3:38 PM, Alexander Thurgood wrote: > Le 05/01/12 20:11, Stephan Bergmann a écrit : > >> I simply sticked to the --with-doxygen scheme for now.  Tinderbox >> maintainers, please remember to install doxygen if not yet present >> (preferred) or add --without-doxygen to a

Re: [Libreoffice] Doxygen for C/C++ URE Documentation

Le 05/01/12 20:11, Stephan Bergmann a écrit : Hi Stephan, > I simply sticked to the --with-doxygen scheme for now. Tinderbox > maintainers, please remember to install doxygen if not yet present > (preferred) or add --without-doxygen to autogen.lastrun (which will > cause the C++ documentation to

Re: [Libreoffice] Doxygen for C/C++ URE Documentation

On 01/06/2012 11:47 AM, Michael Stahl wrote: On 06/01/12 11:07, Caolán McNamara wrote: So, does that mean we can now remove autodoc and udm from the tree ? we still use that for IDL docu (and don't forget "cosv" module) Yeah, next step I plan to do is get rid of autodoc for IDL, too (after t

Re: [Libreoffice] Doxygen for C/C++ URE Documentation

On Fri, 2012-01-06 at 11:47 +0100, Michael Stahl wrote: > we still use that for IDL docu (and don't forget "cosv" module) damn :-( its such a big-ass chunk of code I was hopeful it was a goner. C. ___ LibreOffice mailing list LibreOffice@lists.freedesk

Re: [Libreoffice] Doxygen for C/C++ URE Documentation

On 06/01/12 11:07, Caolán McNamara wrote: > On Thu, 2012-01-05 at 20:11 +0100, Stephan Bergmann wrote: >> On 01/04/2012 03:30 PM, Stephan Bergmann wrote: >>> If there are no objections, I will commit this to master later this week. >> >> Done, >>

Re: [Libreoffice] Doxygen for C/C++ URE Documentation

On Thu, 2012-01-05 at 20:11 +0100, Stephan Bergmann wrote: > On 01/04/2012 03:30 PM, Stephan Bergmann wrote: > > If there are no objections, I will commit this to master later this week. > > Done, >

Re: [Libreoffice] Doxygen for C/C++ URE Documentation

On 01/04/2012 03:30 PM, Stephan Bergmann wrote: If there are no objections, I will commit this to master later this week. Done, "Switch from autodoc to doxygen for SDK C++ documentation." Addit

Re: [Libreoffice] Doxygen for C/C++ URE Documentation

For what it is worth, I would provide an argument so that you could enable or disable the generation. I don't really care what the default is, as long as I can enable or disable doxygen. What can become easy hacks, though, is to clean up the warnings doxygen still produces ... That seems lik

Re: [Libreoffice] Doxygen for C/C++ URE Documentation

On 01/04/2012 07:28 PM, Hanno Meyer-Thurow wrote: On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 17:01:32 +0100 Stephan Bergmann wrote: On 01/04/2012 04:35 PM, Hanno Meyer-Thurow wrote: On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 15:57:58 +0100 Stephan Bergmann wrote: On 01/04/2012 03:58 PM, Hanno Meyer-Thurow wrote: [...] Doxygen won't b

Re: [Libreoffice] Doxygen for C/C++ URE Documentation

On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 12:28 PM, Hanno Meyer-Thurow wrote: > On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 17:01:32 +0100 > Stephan Bergmann wrote: > >> On 01/04/2012 04:35 PM, Hanno Meyer-Thurow wrote: >> > On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 15:57:58 +0100 >> > Stephan Bergmann  wrote: >> >> On 01/04/2012 03:58 PM, Hanno Meyer-Thurow w

Re: [Libreoffice] Doxygen for C/C++ URE Documentation

On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 17:01:32 +0100 Stephan Bergmann wrote: > On 01/04/2012 04:35 PM, Hanno Meyer-Thurow wrote: > > On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 15:57:58 +0100 > > Stephan Bergmann wrote: > >> On 01/04/2012 03:58 PM, Hanno Meyer-Thurow wrote: > [...] > > Doxygen won't be shipped with LO source like all th

Re: [Libreoffice] Doxygen for C/C++ URE Documentation

On 01/04/2012 05:11 PM, Lubos Lunak wrote: Ah, so the URL above is still generated the old way? Yes. But doxygen can generate such an overview too - see http://api.kde.org/4.x-api/kdelibs-apidocs/kdeui/html/globals.html (it is the 'File Members' link on the left). Ah, good to know. (It

Re: [Libreoffice] Doxygen for C/C++ URE Documentation

On Wednesday 04 of January 2012, Stephan Bergmann wrote: > On 01/04/2012 04:15 PM, Lubos Lunak wrote: > > On Wednesday 04 of January 2012, Stephan Bergmann wrote: > >> (One downside of doxygen appears to be that > >> it does not generate an overview of all the non-class-member entities, > >> like f

Re: [Libreoffice] Doxygen for C/C++ URE Documentation

On 01/04/2012 04:35 PM, Hanno Meyer-Thurow wrote: On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 15:57:58 +0100 Stephan Bergmann wrote: On 01/04/2012 03:58 PM, Hanno Meyer-Thurow wrote: [...] Doxygen won't be shipped with LO source like all the other 3rd parties?! Interesting ... God no! And what do you mean with

Re: [Libreoffice] Doxygen for C/C++ URE Documentation

On 01/04/2012 04:17 PM, Bjoern Michaelsen wrote: On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 03:30:03PM +0100, Stephan Bergmann wrote: With autodoc no longer used to document C++, the next step would be to either replace its use to generate IDL docu as well (and completely remove autodoc), or at least remove the C+

Re: [Libreoffice] Doxygen for C/C++ URE Documentation

On 01/04/2012 04:11 PM, Thorsten Behrens wrote: Stephan Bergmann wrote: With autodoc no longer used to document C++, the next step would be to either replace its use to generate IDL docu as well (and completely remove autodoc), or at least remove the C++-specific autodoc code. The SDK includes

Re: [Libreoffice] Doxygen for C/C++ URE Documentation

On 01/04/2012 04:15 PM, Lubos Lunak wrote: On Wednesday 04 of January 2012, Stephan Bergmann wrote: (One downside of doxygen appears to be that it does not generate an overview of all the non-class-member entities, like free functions; it only generates overviews of all the namespaces, classes,

Re: [Libreoffice] Doxygen for C/C++ URE Documentation

On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 15:57:58 +0100 Stephan Bergmann wrote: > On 01/04/2012 03:58 PM, Hanno Meyer-Thurow wrote: > > I would not like to see a new configure flag for doxygen, the odk flag > > suffices; > > generate the documentation anyway. Otherwise it is always good to use > > standards. > > D

Re: [Libreoffice] Doxygen for C/C++ URE Documentation

On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 03:30:03PM +0100, Stephan Bergmann wrote: > So, I tried to switch to doxygen when generating the C/C++ header > documentation in odk/pack/gendocu. > And it worked quite well. > If there are no objections, I will commit this to master later this week. Yes, yes, yes! great!

Re: [Libreoffice] Doxygen for C/C++ URE Documentation

Stephan Bergmann wrote: > And it worked quite well. > Yay! \o/ > The build then has an additional dependency on the doxygen > executable as a prerequisite. This can be controlled via > --with-doxygen, where an explicit --without-doxygen disables > generation of the C/C++ documentation in odk (and

Re: [Libreoffice] Doxygen for C/C++ URE Documentation

On Wednesday 04 of January 2012, Stephan Bergmann wrote: > (One downside of doxygen appears to be that > it does not generate an overview of all the non-class-member entities, > like free functions; it only generates overviews of all the namespaces, > classes, and files.) I'm not sure what you me

Re: [Libreoffice] Doxygen for C/C++ URE Documentation

On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 15:30:03 +0100 Stephan Bergmann wrote: > Hi all, Hi Stephan, > > > "Temporary hack to work around autodoc bug" made it even more evident > that our home-brewed autodoc is no

Re: [Libreoffice] Doxygen for C/C++ URE Documentation

On 01/04/2012 03:58 PM, Hanno Meyer-Thurow wrote: I would not like to see a new configure flag for doxygen, the odk flag suffices; generate the documentation anyway. Otherwise it is always good to use standards. Do you mean, those who do not have doxygen and don't want to or can't install it s

[Libreoffice] Doxygen for C/C++ URE Documentation

Hi all, "Temporary hack to work around autodoc bug" made it even more evident that our home-brewed autodoc is not up to its task and should be replaced. So, I tried to switch to doxygen when gen

Re: [Libreoffice] Doxygen

On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 06:48:53PM -0600, Ed Dean wrote: > All, > > >

[Libreoffice] Doxygen

All, How much effort is there currently to make comments which show up nicely in doxygen? Just curious as to how important it is. I generated the documentation once and it wasn't very helpful (or I was looking in the wrong places in it.) Thanks! ___ L