New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Preprocessor regression: Macro that are not used in file affect the file (Origin: bugzilla #608921) #3662

doxygen opened this Issue Jul 2, 2018 · 0 comments


None yet
1 participant

doxygen commented Jul 2, 2018

status RESOLVED severity critical in component general for ---
Reported in version 1.6.2 on platform Other
Assigned to: Dimitri van Heesch

Original attachment names and IDs:

On 2010-02-03 20:08:40 +0000, Gilles wrote:

Created attachment 152961
Example 1

in newer version of doxygen, all files are preprocessor only once, and already defined macro remain active throughout the run.
The attached file demonstrates that a macro not visible in file2.cpp
so badly polutes the signatures that Doxygen cannot document a method-

The attached file demonstrattes that a macro not visible in file2.cpp
mask the correct method

On 2010-02-03 20:09:27 +0000, Gilles wrote:

Created attachment 152962
Example 2

On 2010-02-03 20:11:43 +0000, Gilles wrote:

The issue originate in the fact that g_fileDefineDict->clear(); at the begin of preprocessFile() has been commented, and in the fact that readIncludeFile skips all files that are already known

Kind Regards

On 2010-02-09 19:09:06 +0000, Gilles wrote:

Describing the issue via zip files is cumbersome for the reader.
Therefore is a description of issue 1:
Doxyfile contains:
INPUT = header1.hpp file1.cpp file2.cpp

header1.hpp contains:

  • \file header1.hpp
  • define some usefull macros


  • \brief Decorate unused parameters in function/method declaration.
  • The macro masks the parameter name from real compiler so that the compiler
  • does not produce warning about the unused paramter.
  • The doxy configuration file contains the definition
  • \verbatim PREDEFINED += "UNUSED(p)=p" \endverbatim
  • so that the parameters are visible to doxygen. This makes it possible to
  • document them
    #define UNUSED(par)

File1.cpp contains:

  • \file file1.cpp
  • include 1 headers and pollute prepocessor
    #include "header1.hpp"

/// \brief polute pre.l
#define cat 42

File2.cpp contains:


  • \file file2.cpp
  • include 1 headers, and some code
    #include "header1.hpp"


  • \brief a test class
    class CTest
    void methOk(int UNUSED(baz), CTest
    UNUSED(foo), char* UNUSED(bar)) ;
    void methBroken(int UNUSED(cat), CTest* UNUSED(foo), char* UNUSED(bar)) ;


  • \brief demonstrate a working usage of the macro UNUSED.
  • \param baz The BAZ param
  • \param foo The FOO param
  • \param bar The BAR param
    void CTest::methOk(int UNUSED(baz), CTest
    UNUSED(foo), char* UNUSED(bar))


  • \brief demonstrate a broken usage of the macro UNUSED.
  • \param cat The CAT param. Alas because Doxygen already read
  •         the file file1.cpp it already kows a macro "cat" defined as "42"
  •         The problem is that Doxgen does no longer reset the dictionary of known macro
  •         g_fileDefineDict->clear(); at the begin of preprocessFile()
  • \param foo The FOO param
  • \param bar The BAR param
    void CTest::methBroken(int UNUSED(cat), CTest
    UNUSED(foo), char* UNUSED(bar))

Doxygen runs write to stdout
C:/usr/gilbert/doxygen/DoxyPre/file2.cpp:30: Warning: argument 'cat' of command
@param is not found in the argument list of CTest::methBroken(int 42, CTest *foo
, char *bar)
C:/usr/gilbert/doxygen/DoxyPre/file2.cpp:30: Warning: The following parameters o
f CTest::methBroken(int 42, CTest *foo, char *bar) are not documented:
parameter '42'

The generated documentations says:
void CTest::methBroken ( int 42,
CTest * foo,
char * bar

demonstrate a broken usage of the macro UNUSED.

Version 1.5.6 did not have the issue

On 2010-02-14 15:34:12 +0000, Dimitri van Heesch wrote:

Confirmed. I'll make doxygen check if a macro definition is "in scope" before it is resolved. Should be fixed in the next subversion update.

On 2010-02-16 14:00:12 +0000, Gilles wrote:

Hi Dimitri,
I already tried to "check if a macro definition is in scope".
This is just a small change in pre.l.
I maintain a list of header that have been opened since preprocessFile() has been called. and i compare this list with the definition place returned by isDefined().
This attempt however revealed an other flaw in the preprocessor. This time a flaw that is also present in old Doxygen versions:

  • \file file1.cpp
  • defines a first version of DUMP

#if defined(DEBUG) || defined(DOXYGEN_MAKE)

  • \brief Dump an integer
  • \param p The integer to dump

define DUMP(p) printf("%d\n", p)


define DUMP(p)

#endif //!DEBUG

and given

  • \file file2.cpp
  • define an other version of dump

/// Some structure
struct Employe
int id;
string name;

#if defined(DEBUG) || defined(DOXYGEN_MAKE)

  • \brief Dump an instance of Employe
  • \param p The empoyee instance to dump

define DUMP(p) printf("[%d] %s\n", p->id, p->name.c_str())


define DUMP(p)

#endif //!DEBUG

#if defined(DEBUG) || defined(DOXYGEN_MAKE)

  • \brief Dump a list of Employe
  • \param p The list

define DUMP_LIST(p) \

      for(list<Employe> it(p.begin()), itEnd(p.end(); \
          it != itEnd;                                \
          ++it)                                       \


define DUMP_LIST(p)

#endif //!DEBUG

Doxygen generates for file2.cpp the following documentation:
#define DUMP_LIST ( p )


for(list it(p.begin()), itEnd(p.end();
it != itEnd;

Where DUMP has a tooltip saying "Dump an integer", and is a link to the DUMP macro within file1.cpp

This is due to the fact that redefinition are ignored in:
if (def==0) // new define
//printf("new define!\n");
else if (def)// name already exists
//printf("existing define!\n");
//printf("define found\n");
if (def->undef) // undefined name
def->undef = FALSE;
def->name = g_defName;
def->definition = g_defText.stripWhiteSpace();
def->nargs = g_defArgs;
def->fileName = g_yyFileName.copy();
def->lineNr = g_yyLineNr;
//printf("Error: define %s is defined more than once!\n",;
What i would like to do if my wife was granting time for it would be to replace
//printf("Error: define %s is defined more than once!\n",;
with building within "def" a link list of "Define*" and wind over this list in isDefined() (Together with the winding over the "active header" that i already added to isDefined()

Kind Regards

On 2010-02-16 14:06:29 +0000, Gilles wrote:

Created attachment 153918
Example for the wrong link

I attached my test files that describe this further problem
The issue if that if i test def->fileName in isDefined() against the list of headers that have been seen since the begining of preprocessFile() then I find that DUMP has been dedined in file1.cpp, and thus when i process file2.cpp my "fixed" isDefined states that DUMP is not defined.
Thus the need to have a link list of all definitions of "DUMP" in this example
Kind regards

On 2010-02-21 12:57:44 +0000, Dimitri van Heesch wrote:

This bug was previously marked ASSIGNED, which means it should be fixed in
doxygen version 1.6.3. Please verify if this is indeed the case. Reopen the
bug if you think it is not fixed and please include any additional information
that you think can be relevant.

On 2010-02-21 20:02:37 +0000, Gilles wrote:

Hi Dimitri
thanks for the quick resolution of the problem described in the attachment 1 and 2.
But it seems that you over read the issue described in
Gilles [reporter] 2010-02-16 14:00:12 UTC
Gilles [reporter] 2010-02-16 14:06:29 UTC

When I run 1.6.3 against the third attachment the link in the definition of DUMP_LIST link to the wrong definition; an the tool tip is the title of the wrong definition

Can you have a second look?

On 2010-06-11 21:08:08 +0000, Dimitri van Heesch wrote:

Can you try with the latest subversion snapshot? I see the link now pointing to the right definition.

On 2010-10-01 01:58:46 +0000, Felipe Besoaín Pino wrote:

ping Gilles?

On 2010-11-22 15:58:02 +0000, Fabio Durán Verdugo wrote:

Closing this bug report as no further information has been provided. Please feel free to reopen this bug if you can provide the information asked for.

@doxygen doxygen closed this Jul 2, 2018

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment