fix https://github.com/ruby/ruby/pull/1722 #4815
Conversation
Truly editorial fix for comments. This works better with Emacs' set-justification-full function. [ci skip]
This script is called from Doxygen many times. Worth optimising. [ci skip]
Didn't question the current settings. This changeset just re-applied `doxygen -g` against: doxygen 1.9.0 (1e72202d8fa0e9d2b3f2a29c88ec4f5790a0a4e2) [ci skip]
Let our VCS manage old contents. [ci skip]
`make capi` warned: > warning: Included by graph for 'dllexport.h' not generated, too many nodes (85) [ci skip]
The new Doxyfile.tmpl says: > # Values that contain spaces should be placed between quotes (\" \"). [ci skip]
It is easier to maintain (e.g. sort them). [ci skip]
This enables me to write `@shyouhei` in C comments without complained by doxygen that @shyouhei is an unknown special command. [ci skip]
These contents are purely implementation details, not worth appearing in CAPI documents. [ci skip]
Must not be a bad idea to improve documents. [ci skip]
Must not be a bad idea to improve documents. [ci skip]
Must not be a bad idea to improve documents. [ci skip]
Must not be a bad idea to improve documents. [ci skip]
Must not be a bad idea to improve documents. [ci skip]
Must not be a bad idea to improve documents. [ci skip]
Unlike other "add doxygen" commits this one adds a preprocessor branch that doxygen would process. This prevents it from parsing other parts of the file.
Must not be a bad idea to improve documents. [ci skip]
Must not be a bad idea to improve documents. [ci skip]
Must not be a bad idea to improve documents. [ci skip]
Must not be a bad idea to improve documents. [ci skip]
Must not be a bad idea to improve documents. [ci skip] In fact many functions declared in the header file are already documented more or less. They were just copy & pasted, with applying some style updates.
Must not be a bad idea to improve documents. [ci skip] In fact many functions declared in the header file are already documented more or less. They were just copy & pasted, with applying some style updates.
Must not be a bad idea to improve documents. [ci skip]
Must not be a bad idea to improve documents. [ci skip]
Must not be a bad idea to improve documents. [ci skip] In fact many functions declared in the header file are already documented more or less. They were just copy & pasted, with applying some style updates.
Must not be a bad idea to improve documents. [ci skip]
Must not be a bad idea to improve documents. [ci skip]
Must not be a bad idea to improve documents. [ci skip]
Must not be a bad idea to improve documents.
|
This looks great. Did you automate the process or do it by hand? I have some bindings for |
|
I did this by hand simply because I wasn't aware of your |
Silly bug, they write back consumed bytes through passed pointers. Must never be pure functions. ruby_scan_oct does not refer any static variables so it can still be __declspec(noalias), while ruby_scan_hex is not because it reads from ruby_digit36_to_number_table.
|
I'm not suggesting that https://github.com/ioquatix/ffi-clang Example: https://github.com/ioquatix/ffi-clang/blob/master/examples/docs.rb |
I was not aware of this because I use clang these days.
Explicit check done at runtime.
I was not aware of this because I use clang these days.
This particular NULL check must be a good thing to do both statically and dynamically.
Noticed that defs/gmake.mk has `exts: rubyspec-capiext` dependency only when $ENABLE_SHARED is true. This one adds extra tests so we basically welcome. Why not default it on.
These warnings are okay here.
RBIMPL_WARNING_PUSH is a 3.0 feature. Rubyspec OTOH has to support 2.x.
What a silly bug.
LTO is about static links. Makes no sense to have DLLs.
|
CI is green... Let's merge this. |
|
@shyouhei Wow, this is a great improvement! I've spend so many hours to inspect ruby sources in order to understand the C-API for writing extensions. This work makes it a lot easier now. doc/extension.rdoc describes many functions in one sentence. This is now somewhat duplicated in the header files. It would be interesting to link them together. Is there an official URL for the generated Doxygen pages? |
|
@larskanis extension.rdoc has its own purpose (provides basics rather than comprehensive lists of things). I don't think we can replace that document using doxygen. But yes, we lack official doxygen pages, which are definitely nice if any. |
... by actually documenting everything.
I'm pretty sure I made literally thousands of mistakes here (this is a 25k+ LOC pull request), but I believe this is at least better than nothing.