Re: man coreaudio (?)
Re: man coreaudio (?)
- Subject: Re: man coreaudio (?)
- From: Chris Reed <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2003 09:28:08 -0500
On Oct 13, 2003, at 6:13 PM, Bill Dozier wrote:
On Monday, October 13, 2003, at 03:27 PM, Chris Reed wrote:
That's mostly true, but there are frequently new things in the
headers. Also, there's occasionally documentation that is not in
headerdoc form. (See AudioToolbox/AudioFile.h for an example.)
WHY is it not in headerdoc form? I work for a small company (~20
developers) and we insist that all our doxygen info be kept
up-to-date, and this is for stuff that is never going to be used by
outside developers. I think it's reasonable to expect no less from
Apple.
Agreed. (I use doxygen for all my projects too.)
(I wish Apple could switch to doxygen, but it doesn't yet support
Objective-C. I took a look at adding ObjC support, but it's a huge
amount of work since the parser for all of doxygen's supported
languages is currently mixed into a single flex source file.)
This, too, is Apple's job. Objective-C is now basically a proprietary,
Apple-only language.
This I really have to disagree with. Go explore
http://www.gnustep.org
(And I'm sure they would disagree with you too! :)
Apple is asking people that are used to working in C, C++, Java,
python, perl, etc. to use Obj-C. It is up to them to provide support
for it in quasi-standard tools like emacs (the Obj-C mode sucks
compared to any other language I use) or doxygen.
It's your option to use ObjC or not. If you don't like it, use Carbon.
Anyway, this discussion is getting pretty OT....
-chris
_______________________________________________
coreaudio-api mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/coreaudio-api
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.