Re: Babel vs. Doxygen?

[Michael Hannon <jm_hannon@yahoo.com>]

On Thursday, March 29, 2012 at 1:04 AM Sebastien Vauban wrote:

> Michael Hannon wrote:
>> Greetings.  I just ran across an article about Doxygen [1], and I'm
>> trying to
>
> Forgotten footnote?

Hi, Seb.  Yep, the footnote appears in my draft message but not in the final
message.  Don't know what happened.  I'm sure this isn't a mystery to anybody,
but here's the reference:

    [1] http://www.doxygen.org/

>> understand if there's any intersection between Doxygen/Roxygen and Org mode
>> Babel, both of which seem to have literate programming as a goal.  Any
>> thoughts about this?  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 make
> 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
> where 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.

Thanks, this all makes good sense to me.  I guess I was basically wondering if
people were routinely using some combination of Doxygen and Org mode -- maybe
including Doxygen markup inside the Org file, then running doxygen on the
tangled output or ...  This is evidently not a common/useful way of working.

-- Mike