Re: Documenting the Zend2 extension API
| From: | Derick Rethans | Date: | Thu, 26 Apr 2007 07:15:08 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Documenting the Zend2 extension API | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 4 5 | Groups: | php.internals |
| Request: | Send a blank email to internals+get-29046@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
On Thu, 26 Apr 2007, Marcus Boerger wrote:
> Hello Antony,
>
> Thursday, April 26, 2007, 12:05:07 AM, you wrote:
>
> > On 04/26/2007 01:45 AM, Gwynne Raskind wrote:
> >> Hmm... For some reason I missed that in my searches. That being
> >> said, the existence of one doesn't preclude the writing of another
> >> :). Also, it seems the official documentation in the PHP manual
> >> could use some serious updating, which I would also be willing to
> >> undertake if people think that would be more useful.
>
> > Actually I've been recently thinking of adding some kind of
> > documentation to the sources. Surely this is not supposed to be
> > something similar to php.net/manual/, just short descriptions of
> > functions and their arguments, which can be used as a start for the
> > "real" documentation. But I wasn't lucky enough to find a utility
> > that would fit my (personal) needs.
>
> > Doxygen (which seems to be uses by the majority of F/OSS projects)
> > generates completely unreadable docs. Every time I look into ICU
> > docs (generated by Doxygen) I get lost for 10 minutes trying to find
> > a function _by name_. In the same time, other tools do not provide
> > such a wide range of output formats as available in Doxygen.
>
> Hu? It has a search option if you want. And it has alphabetical lists
> for functions, consts, classes, files, modules, whatever. And if that
> is not enough we could take it's xml output to feed a database and
> provide a fulltext search on that.
That doesn't make the docs more readable though...
Derick
--
Derick Rethans
http://derickrethans.nl | http://ez.no | http://xdebug.org