Page MenuHomePhabricator

[docs] Fix doxygen comments wrongly attached to the llvm namespace

Authored by nicolas17 on Feb 15 2021, 4:18 PM.



Looking at the Doxygen-generated documentation for the llvm namespace
currently shows all sorts of random comments from different parts of the
codebase. These are mostly caused by:

  • File doc comments that aren't marked with \file, so they're attached to the next declaration, which is usually "namespace llvm {".
  • Class doc comments placed before the namespace rather than before the class.
  • Code comments before the namespace that (in my opinion) shouldn't be extracted by doxygen at all.

This commit fixes these comments. The generated doxygen documentation now
has proper docs for several classes and files, and the docs for the llvm
and llvm::detail namespaces are now empty.

Diff Detail

Event Timeline

nicolas17 created this revision.Feb 15 2021, 4:18 PM
nicolas17 requested review of this revision.Feb 15 2021, 4:18 PM
Herald added a project: Restricted Project. · View Herald TranscriptFeb 15 2021, 4:18 PM
thakis accepted this revision.Tue, Apr 6, 11:47 AM
This revision is now accepted and ready to land.Tue, Apr 6, 11:47 AM

In general LGTM, once you address the couple of points I raised, and address the relevant linter issues.


I think you should just update the comment to describe is_detected, instead of talking about 'utilities' in general.


Since clang-format is complaining this line is too long anyway, I think you could just remove the redundant mention of 'pass'.

nicolas17 updated this revision to Diff 335663.Tue, Apr 6, 2:44 PM

Rebase and apply suggestions

Update the comment for is_detected, and fix some linter complaints.

nicolas17 marked 2 inline comments as done.Tue, Apr 6, 2:47 PM

I don't have commit access, please push this for me.


We should actually remove the redundant "MachineDominanaceFrontier" from the comment (I just noticed this one isn't even spelled correctly!), but then I would need to do it to the others, and that certainly belongs in a different commit...

mizvekov accepted this revision.Tue, Apr 6, 3:12 PM
This revision was landed with ongoing or failed builds.Tue, Apr 6, 4:20 PM
This revision was automatically updated to reflect the committed changes.