How good is RDoc at documenting "raw" C++ code?

[M. Edward (Ed) Borasky]

Just out of curiosity, if I have some fairly well constructed C++ code,
how good a job of document generation can I expect to get from RDoc with
no modifications to the code?

 

[Suraj N. Kurapati]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Just out of curiosity, if I have some fairly well constructed C++ code,
how good a job of document generation can I expect to get from RDoc with
no modifications to the code?

Doxygen is better suited for this task:
http://www.stack.nl/~dimitri/doxygen/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFE/vlZmV9O7RYnKMcRAug2AJ4szOAeYl8de1KPhZGs35Gdb+PJvwCdEXzE
HtgaQZUYOtCLXK+1nkjuxIw=
=RO8u
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

 

[Suraj N. Kurapati]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Le 6 sept. 06 � 18:38, Suraj N. Kurapati a �crit :

however, it seems to me, they are not speaking about ruby ???

Correct, they are not speaking of documenting Ruby. Instead, they
are speaking of using RDoc on C++ code.

Doxygen is better suited for C and C++.
RDoc is better suited for Ruby.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFE/wLomV9O7RYnKMcRAlhOAJ9OYrL+dqL7STvU2Cv7ziBAJv2DEgCfcArF
1OAY8YaWhyz9ngcZ2Ee10c4=
=cgK4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

 

[M. Edward (Ed) Borasky]

=20
Correct, they are not speaking of documenting Ruby. Instead, they
are speaking of using RDoc on C++ code.
=20
Doxygen is better suited for C and C++.
RDoc is better suited for Ruby.

Yeah ... I have Doxygen installed. I suspect RDoc will do just fine on
"vanilla C" code, but I also suspect C++ will break it.