Re: Documentation Generation

[nj.lee@kiwa.co.nz (Nicholas Lee)]

On Thu, 4 Jun 1998 04:06:32 +0000, you wrote:

>Here is a pro-cons list of these too.  What other tools can people suggest?
>I remember someone was raving about how good some particular tool was,
>but I can't remember what that was, or find the mail.
>

>
>        CONS:
>             -  I had to use the binary since it didn't compile.  That sort of
>                 thing annoys me.

I had the same problem trying to compile it with both egcs 1.0.3 and gcc
2.8.1.   Some sort of struct (functor) defined in a template function.
Reading the doc++ documentation it seems that it only produces html and
latex currently

Personally I like the look of Perceps, it's perl based so there should be
less compilation problems.

It seems to have quite a nice mechanism for creating different templates
for source->document production.  Currently it ships with man, html, latex
templates and a rtf example, and it seems easy enough to expand this to
other documentation types.  

Another tool of use could be LXR (http://lxr.linux.no/), al though not a
documentation tool, it looks very useful for browsing the source tree.


Nicholas



--
Nicholas Lee, Kiwa Enterprises Ltd
postmaster for kiwa.co in nz
NO SPAM for me!