| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | John Morris <john(dot)morris(at)crunchydata(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bohdan Mart <mart(dot)bogdan(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "postgres(at)coyotebush(dot)net" <postgres(at)coyotebush(dot)net>, Stefan Kaltenbrunner <stefan(at)kaltenbrunner(dot)cc> |
| Subject: | Re: Where can I find the doxyfile? |
| Date: | 2024-02-13 15:02:55 |
| Message-ID: | ZcuEn0t-2OBIX90X@momjian.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Feb 5, 2024 at 05:29:08PM +0000, John Morris wrote:
> >> It seems something you want to keep for your personal use.
>
> >> I think this filter is the kind of genious idea that it's OK if you
>
> >> can do it at home
>
> I don’t agree with your characterization.
>
> The purpose of the filter is to bring existing Postgres comments into the
> doxygen output. While I haven’t done a full survey, the majority of Postgres
> code has comments describing functions, globals, macros and structure fields.
>
> Currently, those comments are thrown away. They do not appear in the existing
> Doxygen output.
I have found it very strange that a tool like doxygen which can create
all sorts of call graphs, just ignores some comments. The comments
above function are very important.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com
Only you can decide what is important to you.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tomas Vondra | 2024-02-13 15:08:16 | Re: brininsert optimization opportunity |
| Previous Message | Dave Cramer | 2024-02-13 14:34:46 | Re: When extended query protocol ends? |