Re: Markup for function pointers in structs

On Mon, 2001-12-10 at 06:48, Matthias Clasen wrote:
> The generated markup for struct members which are pointers to functions
> taking arguments
> is really weak. A good example is:
> I think it would be much better to suppress the parameter list in the list
> of struct members, since
> it is already visible in the struct declaration.

I think the aim was to get rid of the struct declaration which is copied
straight from the header file, and just output the documentation.

So it may be better to try to improve the markup.

I'm not entirely sure, though. Is it bad to include the struct directly
in the docs, with the comments in it? It isn't proper DocBook, is it?


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]