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

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