Task #164

Doxygen Cleanup

Added by Marc Zinnschlag almost 7 years ago. Updated over 3 years ago.

Code Maintenance
Target version:
Start date:
% Done:




A full run of Doxygen produces a couple of warnings and error messages. At least some of them look like typos. Could also be a misconfiguration in the Doxyfiles somewhere.


#1 Updated by Marc Zinnschlag over 6 years ago

  • Target version set to openmw-future

#2 Updated by Benoît Hoessen over 5 years ago

  • Assignee set to Benoît Hoessen

I've started to dig up the different errors we get when the documentation is generated and there are a lot of errors that are generated because we have things like this:

myFunction(Ogre::Vector3& v);

using namespace Ogre;
myFunction(Vector3& v){...}

There are different ways to deal with it:
1) remove the parsing of the cpp files. The argument for that is that the documentation should be present in the header and not in the cpp. And if we would ever define a class inside a cpp for a local usage, this shouldn't be shown in the doxygen documentation.
2) make sure we stay consistent within the implementation and the declaration. And every non-consistent declaration/implementation should be changed.

#3 Updated by Benoît Hoessen over 5 years ago

  • Status changed from New to Resolved
  • % Done changed from 0 to 90

I've used option 2: make sure we stay consistent

changes made are visible here:

There's only one warning left:
openmw/libs/openengine/bullet/BulletShapeLoader.cpp:67: Warning: documented function `BulletShapeManager * Ogre::Singleton::msSingleton' was not declared or defined.

Corresponding line:
template<> BulletShapeManager *Ogre::Singleton<BulletShapeManager>::msSingleton = 0;

And I don't know how to remove it

#4 Updated by scrawl . over 3 years ago

  • Status changed from Resolved to Rejected
  • Assignee deleted (Benoît Hoessen)
  • Target version deleted (openmw-future)
  • % Done changed from 90 to 0

This needs to be confirmed again, if there are still doxygen warnings, please open a new issue.

#5 Updated by Marc Zinnschlag over 3 years ago

There is no reason to assume that anything has changed. Does not require testing IMO. However we pretty much concluded that it is impossible to get rid of the warnings without injecting loads of junk into the source code. Therefore I am okay with the rejected status.

Also available in: Atom PDF