This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Thoughts on doxygen for internal documentation
- From: Theodore Papadopoulo <Theodore dot Papadopoulo at sophia dot inria dot fr>
- To: Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>
- Cc: law at redhat dot com, Diego Novillo <dnovillo at redhat dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 19:57:08 +0100
- Subject: Re: Thoughts on doxygen for internal documentation
aph@redhat.com said:
>> As an example, I always wondered why the rule of 80 columns is still
>> that strict.
Please do not focus on the 80 columns debate... I do not really care,
even though my opinion appeared clearly. I was just asking for a
review of the standards to put them in sync with current practice
(times the importance of the contribution of the developper giving
his opinion, since I do not expect anyone to give a lot of weight on
my personnal feelings since my contributions are unfortunately
basically zero).
The important question is doxygen or not or something else but the /**
should not be a rigid constraint if (and only if) the tool is
considered as valuable. Again doxygen is just an example.
Formatting constraints (whatever they are) are good as long as they
are not a blocking factor.
Then, on the 80 columns stuff (which I should not have raised perhaps
since it's not the best example), let me just add that
newspaper and code are quite different ;-P !!!
Maybe we should try formatting the files in 2 columns of forty
characters, but I guess gcc would have difficulty in gobbling those
files :-)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Theodore Papadopoulo
Email: Theodore.Papadopoulo@sophia.inria.fr Tel: (33) 04 92 38 76 01
--------------------------------------------------------------------