Re: XML documentation

Onorio Catenacci wrote:

> Define "compatible".  If you mean that the xml output from Doxygen must
use
> the same xml tags as the xml output from the MS C# compiler, then I'd say
> your simplest answer would be to use custom xml tags in your C# code that
> match those output by Doxygen.  Or you could feed Doxygen's xml output
> through an XSLT transformation and make it look like the xml output by the
> MS C# compiler.
I've started writing such an xslt-sheet, but I am not a specialist in XML
and/or XSLT, you see.

> I've looked at both the MS C# xml and Doxygen's output.  Doxygen's output
> is superior to the MS C# xml, in my opinion.  The MS C# xml seems to have
> been an afterthought.  I'd use Doxygen to document my C# code if I were
> you.

Of course doxygen is quite a powerfull tool and does its job very well, but
there are some things that NDoc (which uses C#-like xml) has that oxygen has
not. NDoc generates one page for each member, it groups compounds by
namespaces and of course supports features like properties and events. I
know doxygen is not intented to support MS specific extensions, nevertheless
those features were pretty cool. However, I prefer the documentation syntax
of doxygen - I don't like XML within my source code:

/// <summary>This is a brief description</summary>
class Foo
{

/// <summary>Brief description for a method</summary>
/// <param name="param1">A parameter</summary>
/// <returns>Returns 42 </returns>
int MyMethod(int param1);

};

looks much worse than

/// This is a brief description
class Foo
{
/// Brief description for a method</summary>
/// @param param1 A parameter
/// @return Returns 42
int MyMethod(int param1);
};


- Andre




-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: SlickEdit Inc. Develop an edge.
The most comprehensive and flexible code editor you can use.
Code faster. C/C++, C#, Java, HTML, XML, many more. FREE 30-Day Trial.
www.slickedit.com/sourceforge