[spud] doxygen

[Mark Shinwell]

On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 05:36:54PM +0000, Olly Betts wrote:
> In message <20001031170336.E11417@mrs30.quns.cam.ac.uk>, Mark Shinwell writes:
> >On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 04:45:33PM +0000, Olly Betts wrote:
> >> I've a couple of reservations - such systems can lead to swathes of
> >> pointless documentation which just wastes people time when they try to read
> >> it.
> >
> >True, perhaps accessor functions like this can be documented separately?
> >I don't know if doxygen supports anything like this...
> 
> Perhaps my point wasn't clear (or perhaps yours isn't...)
> 
> What I'm saying is that if all you can think to tell me about
> get_description() is that it "gets a description", then don't bother giving
> it a documentation comment (doxygen lists classes and methods with no
> documentation comments too).
(snip)

I see what you meant now.  I agree entirely.

Mark

-- 
Mark Shinwell -- http://mrs30.quns.cam.ac.uk -- Mark.Shinwell@cl.cam.ac.uk
Theory and Semantics Group, University of Cambridge Computer Laboratory