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

Bug #313527 regression - Enum in bitfield is not parsed properly. (Origin: bugzilla #748208) #5779

doxygen opened this Issue Jul 2, 2018 · 0 comments


None yet
1 participant

doxygen commented Jul 2, 2018

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

Original attachment names and IDs:

On 2015-04-20 18:53:51 +0000, Jonathan Duncan wrote:

Created attachment 302020
Test case that causes error.

Bug # 313527 which was fixed seems to have regressed during changes to add support for c++11 explicitly typed enums.

The version that reintroduced the bad behaviour was at least "Release-".


enum testenum {

/** testing struct */
struct testing {
    enum testenumtest1:2; ///< This field does not get parsed properly
    unsigned int test2:30; ///< other field

The documentation for "struct testing" gets mangled as follows:

unsigned int 	test2:30
  < This is the field that does not get parsed properly More...

I have found fix that seems to work, however my knowledge of the doxygen source code is not good so it may not be the best way of doing this.

On 2015-04-20 18:54:50 +0000, Jonathan Duncan wrote:

Created attachment 302021
Broken HTML output

On 2015-04-20 18:58:41 +0000, Jonathan Duncan wrote:

Created attachment 302022
patch of proposed fix.

Added a patch with proposed fix.

On 2015-04-20 19:00:05 +0000, Jonathan Duncan wrote:

I've also created a pull request on github if that is preferred.

On 2015-04-21 18:45:48 +0000, Jonathan Duncan wrote:

The first patch is breaks several tests. I'm working on a better solution.

On 2015-04-21 20:03:34 +0000, Jonathan Duncan wrote:

The last comment was made in error. It does not refer to this issue.

On 2015-05-03 07:52:04 +0000, Dimitri van Heesch wrote:

Confirmed. Should be fixed in the next GIT update.

On 2015-06-27 19:02:00 +0000, Dimitri van Heesch wrote:

This bug was previously marked ASSIGNED, which means it should be fixed in
doxygen version 1.8.10. 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 (preferably in the form of a self-contained example).

@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