[cfe-dev] A new clang-based documentation tool

[barbara via cfe-dev]

Athos,

A few minor points if I may. To be a replacement for Doxygen you would 
need to support C++ as well as other languages such as C, C#, 
JavaScript, Fortran, PHP, Python, etc.  You will also need to support 
multiple outputs like HTML, CHM, RTF, Latex, QDoc, Docbook, etc.  You 
will need to offer multiple types of diagrams, markdown syntax, and a 
plethora of configuration options. If your new product does all this 
that is wonderful.

DoxyPress is indeed a fork of Doxygen which is both a blessing and a 
curse. In the two plus years we have worked on DoxyPress the changes 
have been more than substantial.  To dismiss a product simply because it 
is a fork misses the point.  We greatly value the work which has been 
done on Doxygen.

DoxyPress is however a fundamentally different product from Doxygen. The 
internals of our application have diverged from the original product. We 
use modern C++,  value based instead of pointer based container classes, 
smart pointers for memory management, and a slew of other 
modifications.  It is faster and able to document languages and provide 
output which Doxygen has issues with.

The basic idea I wanted to bring up is that DoxyPress is very different 
internally and will continue to improve as our team has been growing and 
by all indications will continue to do so.


Barbara




> Thanks for the heads up, but we were aware of those options and how far we could get with Doxygen itself. It being clang-based was not really the motivation behind the project; we just started fresh and Clang was by far the best option as a parser, hence we didn't simply opt for Doxygen or a modification thereof. The same goes for DoxyPress of course, as it is a fork of Doxygen, making it not much different.
>
> Our tool is a Doxygen replacement to us (and perhaps others eventually), but it is definitely very different in aspects such as output, configuration and with that, customization. We simply refer to Doxygen due to its seemingly dominant presence for creating c++ documentation.
>
> Also, if all goes well, it should also be more feasible to integrate into build systems, which gives, especially us, some options for scaling more easily too. A not unwelcome addition I'd say. There's some things left to do before that, though, but we'll make sure to keep this up to date as development progresses.
>
> - Athos
>




---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus