Anyhow, an integration between them is straightforward (FoBiS.py is currently under refactoring to be more modular). > FoBiS.py can be easily coupled with Ford ( lines 132+). > If you are searching for an automatic building tool, you can try: > straightforward once the tool has digested a program package. > don't see this in the feature list, although this appears to be Does the tool generate dependencies for Makefiles etc.? I
> module/type/procedure hierarchy index etc., that would indeed be The useful part is automatic generation of a > Il giorno lunedì 12 gennaio 2015 10:41:21 UTC+1, Wolfgang Kilian ha scritto:
#Doxygen fortran example code#
If the programmer adheres to a convention where code is part of theĭocumentation (Literate Programming, with tools such as web/noweb forĮxtracting the code), documentation naturally comes before code. Comment lines must alwaysįollow the declarations to which they belong. Unfortunately, the author requires the programmer to follow a philosophy Straightforward once the tool has digested a program package. Does the tool generate dependencies for Makefiles etc.? Iĭon't see this in the feature list, although this appears to be Module/type/procedure hierarchy index etc., that would indeed be > I would like to point out a new project (not mine) for modern fortran documentation that, in my opinion, overtakes all other tool:
#Doxygen fortran example download#
Latter, you would have to download ROBODoc and run it, to generate theĭocs.) If you want to get a look at the ROBODoc formatting/etc. (However the documentation is not available online for the For example checkout Stafano Zaghi'sĬan also find the generated output in a link in the README.md) and I still haven't made up my mind, but have seen Fortran However, it seems like Doxygen has someīuilt in scanning capabilities, whereas ROBODoc pulls everything from The output ofĭoxygen baffles me a bit, I find that top menu a bit unintuitive and Right now, I am choosing between doxygen and ROBODoc. He has switched toĭoxygen for his documentation purposes, after Doxygen added better
Website are outdated, but ARE up to date on GitHub. Seems he no longer uses or maintains this tool his projects on his I've been in contact with the FortranDOC author, Stefano Zaghi, and it
> I would also be interested in experiences. Sometimes I even read that documentation.
#Doxygen fortran example plus#
Plus the front end fortran scanner uses that flex thing which I knowĪnyway, the code I document using that tool uses lots of F2003 stuff. Going I doubt I will have the time to do that for another 3.14 decades. Things into the shape I think they should be. Spend some time one day (more likely, one month or one quarter) beating Perhaps participating in its development.īecause of the sunk cost of my existing documentation I would like to I guess these changes indicate that other Fortran users exist and are One and he simply needs to spend a bit more time experimenting. Wacky, though there is also the possibility that this user is the wacky Nearest equivalent concept in other language models has been a bit Interfaces and procedure bindings across to what someone thought was the Versions its mapping of Fortran language concepts like modules, generic I'm not totally happy with it because some of the newerįeatures of the language still confuse it a little, plus in recent
0 kommentar(er)
