[pacman-dev] [PATCH 2/2] Document API changes for pacman-3.5 release

Rémy Oudompheng remyoudompheng at gmail.com
Tue Mar 1 02:25:12 EST 2011

On 2011/2/28 Dan McGee <dpmcgee at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 4:02 PM, Rémy Oudompheng
> <remyoudompheng at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Would you approve documenting in alpm.h the type of elements in lists
>> returned by libalpm functions ? They do not look obvious at all for
>> someone that is not familiar with the internals of libalpm.
> Definitely. If you can do it in Doxygen style that would be a step in
> the right direction too, since we could eventually get autogenerated
> docs and manpages, but baby steps.

Do we want to put any documentation in alpm.h or would it better to
have Doxygen style only in the source code, documenting the public API

I hesitate between two approaches : I see a use of Doxygen groups
(with the @addtogroup command) but sometimes, it seems very natural to
use an object-oriented style. For example, we could document
alpm_pkg_get_depends() as

 * Returns a reference to the list of package dependencies.
 * @public @memberof pmpkg_t
 * @return a pointer to a list of pmdepend_t structures.
alpm_list_t *alpm_pkg_get_depends(pmpkg_t *pkg);

So that it shows on a page dedicated to pmpkg_t.


More information about the pacman-dev mailing list