Re: Re: Some consistency in IDL please

On 10/29/10 1:35 PM, Frank Schönheit wrote:
> Hi Jürgen,
> 
>> exactly the links back into the DevGuide are useful at least from my
>> point of view.
> 
> Sure, I didn't say they aren't useful. The question is whether we should
> evaluate how to replicate this functionality in doxygen. Using an
> existing source code documentation tool, and enhancing it (via some
> "plugins") to our special needs seems to be more reasonable than having
> an own tool.
> 
> Sure, it is well possible that there's no way to plug this into doxygen
> - fine then.
> 
i am totally with you. If possible and someone would provide a solution
it's fine and we can easy repalce the existing mechanism.

> Still, for C++ documentation, I don't see a real benefit (feature- or
> otherwise) of the current autodoc, compared with doxygen.
+1, i see only advantages for doxygen

Juergen