From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Sebastien Vauban" Subject: Re: Babel vs. Doxygen? Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2012 10:04:07 +0200 Message-ID: <80hax7bzpk.fsf@somewhere.org> References: <1332985539.87406.YahooMailNeo@web161901.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org-mXXj517/zsQ@public.gmane.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org-mXXj517/zsQ@public.gmane.org To: emacs-orgmode-mXXj517/zsQ@public.gmane.org Hi Michael, Michael Hannon wrote: > Greetings.=C2=A0 I just ran across an article about Doxygen [1], and I'm = trying to Forgotten footnote? > understand if there's any intersection between Doxygen/Roxygen and Org mo= de > Babel, both of which seem to have literate programming as a goal.=C2=A0 A= ny > thoughts about this?=C2=A0 Thanks. It just is completely different: with Babel, you put code blocks inside documentation to be read by a human. With Doxygen and the like, you put special comments (for generating doc) inside your code. That's the opposite! You could view it as more or less equal, but it's not. LP allows you to mak= e a documentation, and spread code blocks in any order inside it, in the order which make more sense for the user to understand your strategy, method, etc. LP allows you also to write a block of code once, and reuse it (even with parameters) in multiple places, avoiding copy/pasted code for languages whe= re such a thing is sometimes difficult to avoid (SQL, Makefile, etc.), or where avoiding it would make the code even much more complex. These two last arguments are simply not applicable for Doxygen. Best regards, Seb --=20 Sebastien Vauban