Skip to content
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

VHDL: it's not possible to document concurrent statements (Origin: bugzilla #618374) #3771

Closed
doxygen opened this Issue Jul 2, 2018 · 0 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
1 participant
@doxygen
Copy link
Owner

doxygen commented Jul 2, 2018

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

Original attachment names and IDs:

On 2010-05-11 14:57:02 +0000, Steffen Jaeckel wrote:

In VHDL it's possible to do things either in processes or as concurrent statements, doxygen allows currently only processes to be documented.

A short example would be

entity ent is
port ( clr: in std_logic;
clk: in std_logic;
s: out std_logic);
end ent;
architecture ent_arch of ent is
signal ent_sig1 : std_logic;
begin

--! @brief do something in process
--! @details and this will be document
proc_foo: process(clr, clk)
if(clr = '1') then
ent_sig1 <= '0';
elsif (rising_edge(clk)) then
ent_sig1 <= not(ent_sig1);
end if;
end process proc_foo;

--! @brief do something concurrent
--! @details but this can't be documented
--! or worse, it will be added to a following process :(
s <= clr or ent_sig1; --! this doesn't work neither :(
end ent_arch;

On 2010-05-17 09:51:06 +0000, s.sampat@ektronic.de wrote:

Confirmed. This bug needs to be definitely corrected.

As of now there is now way to document the concurrent statements in doxygen. I am forced to omit this documentation from doxygen processing as these comments are added to the next process' comments, which is totally wrong.

It is also quite difficult to decide now, how to let the concurrent statements be documented. A sensible way would be to list all documented concurrent statements in order of appearance in the code, under a heading "Concurrent Statements" or something similar to that.

On 2011-02-24 16:58:17 +0000, mk wrote:

Created attachment 181849
patch for documenting inline code\concurrent statements

inline code documentation

syntax

--!\brief bla bla
--!\code name_of statement
...
code
...
--!\endcode

architecture Behavioral of comp_stc_freq_ctrl is

begin

p11: process(clk,a,s,g,d,de)
begin
--! \brief inline fragment
--! \code inline_code

if rising_edge(clk) then
if rst='1' then
o <= '0';
else
o <= i;
end if;
end if;

--! \endcode

end process;

--! \brief concurrent statement
--! \code concurrent
ds_mem <= wr_en AND req;
--! \endcode

end Behavioral;

On 2011-02-24 17:01:19 +0000, mk wrote:

the patch is against 1.7.3

On 2011-02-25 14:54:39 +0000, mk wrote:

Created attachment 181917
patch for documenting inline code\concurrent statements

improved my previous patch.

On 2011-02-26 15:32:28 +0000, Dimitri van Heesch wrote:

Hi Martin,

I'll include the patch.
I did notice the LaTeX output produced for the example you provided is broken (both with and without patch). Do you test this yourself?

On 2011-02-27 21:05:11 +0000, mk wrote:

I did not check the Latex output.
If I find a bug, I'll make a new patch.

Martin

On 2011-02-28 18:29:21 +0000, mk wrote:

Created attachment 182116
documenting inline code\concurrent statements

Indeed the LaTex output is broken.
This patch should fix this bug.

On 2011-02-28 20:00:33 +0000, Dimitri van Heesch wrote:

Hi Martin,

I had already applied your patch (and fixed the formatting).
Can you tell me what you changed to fix the latex bug, or attach a delta patch for that fix only?

On 2011-04-15 13:22:34 +0000, Tobias Mueller wrote:

Martin: Ping.

On 2011-06-28 23:52:23 +0000, Fabio Durán Verdugo wrote:

Martin: ping!

On 2011-10-20 09:39:42 +0000, Tobias Mueller 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.
Thanks!

@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
You can’t perform that action at this time.