Subject: Re: Doxygen generated documentation
To: None <firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com>
From: Matthew Mondor <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 05/24/2005 18:01:43
On Tue, 24 May 2005 11:55:31 +0000 (UTC)
Rui Paulo <email@example.com> wrote:
> > Not saying that graphs like what Rui showed aren't nice or useful
> > though, but I don't think we should migrate from man pages to doxigen
> > generated docs, or bloat the NetBSD code with extended documentation...
> I agree with Bill's point: both are useful and if we have call graphs
> that help understanding a framework, I think it's better than nothing.
Yes, those graphs definitely seem most useful as a complement to our
current documentation (I was astonished looking at them, thanks for the
I just hope if we used both, that the rate at which man pages are
updated doesn't yet drop more, and that the code doesn't eventually
get bloated with alot of documentation rather than the currently short
and concise comments... Probably only possible long-term issues we have
to remember to avoid IMO
Note: Please only reply on the list since other mail is blocked by default.
Private messages from your address can be allowed by first asking, however.