On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 4:17 PM, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@xxxxxxx> wrote: > I assume you're referring to gtk-doc? It's web page > (http://www.gtk.org/gtk-doc/) starts by noting that it's "a bit awkward to > setup and use"; they recommend looking at Doxygen instead. So I guess I'm > not really sure what it offers that merits throwing another option into > the mix now? What am I missing? We use gtk-doc for the i915 testcase and tooling repo in userspace (intel-gpu-tools). The setup is somewhat arcane (some build-fu that is fumbly, and xml files to tie everything together). But it looks pretty and works well otherwise. It should be at https://01.org/linuxgraphics/gfx-docs/igt/ but our autobuilder seems to be screwed up right now. Of course I considered it as an option, but like doxygen it has it's own strong opinion about how in-code comments should look like, and those differ from kerneldoc syntax. Beyond that I don't really see benefits over any of the solutions proposed here already (either sphinx or rst or horror! even the hackfest I still carry around in drm-intel.git branches). Btw for igt we went with gtkdoc over docygen because a few people on our team had "doxygen only over my corpse" level kind of strong opinions. Everyone just loves their own color choice for this bikeshed ;-) -Daniel -- Daniel Vetter Software Engineer, Intel Corporation +41 (0) 79 365 57 48 - http://blog.ffwll.ch -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
