Re: Doxygen status

Hi all,

I've never directly used it myself,. it's just that some of the earlier
engines had comments in the format, and I figured it didn't hurt to
maintain consistency. And it might prove convenient for someone in the
future other than myself to understand and maintain engines that I'd worked
on. But if it is indeed messy at the moment, we could always drop it. It
wouldn't matter if people kept doing comments in the form anyway or used
some other.

DreamMaster.


On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 5:09 PM Matan Bareket <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi team,
> Taking a pass on doxygen, and it seems like it needs a lot of attention.
> There are multiple doxygen comments that are outdated with either wrong or
> missing parameters, no modules are defined and as a result our generated
> docs are honestly quite bad.
>
> Is anyone finding any value in the generated docs at this day and age? I'd
> like to propose getting rid of doxygen unless there's a case to keeping it.
> If you do feel strongly about keeping Doxygen, please let me know why - and
> if it's so useful would you be able to take updating it as a project?
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Scummvm-devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.scummvm.org/listinfo/scummvm-devel
>

_______________________________________________
Scummvm-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.scummvm.org/listinfo/scummvm-devel