Re: Doxygen documentation

[Thomas Davie]

On 21 Sep 2011, at 22:52, Riccardo Mottola wrote:

> Hi
>> 
>> And the reason I brought this up is because I'm starting to document 
>> corebase.  Seeing as I'm starting from scratch I'm having a serious look at 
>> which doc generator to use.  It would probably be a quite large effort move 
>> all of current gnustep documentation to doxygen and probably something that 
>> wouldn't happen overnight, as you suggest.
> Well, i also think that projects gravitating around gnustep.org should use 
> all the same document generator. Thus I think using autogsdoc is a good thing 
> for other projects too and that is what I use and recommend for all GAP 
> projects.
> 
> it's a bit like most people use javadoc with java. It's the the standard one.

Just a heads up, given the scope of gnustep, if it were to change to a 
different documentation tool, appledoc might be a sane one to consider.  It 
uses doxygen style comments, but produces much nicer (and more apple 
documentation like) output:

http://www.gentlebytes.com/home/appledocapp/

It's also written in Obj-C and Cocoa, so if GNUstep could eat this dog food it 
might be a nice flag to fly.

Bob