1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
|
The approach I've been using for a given header is to recursively do each
of the "bits" headers which make up the standard header. So, e.g., while
there are five headers making up <algorithm>, three of them were already
documented in the course of doing other headers.
"Untouched" means I've deliberately skipped it for various reasons, or
haven't gotten to it yet. It /will/ be done (by somebody, eventually.)
Area Still needs to be doxygen-documented
-----------------------------------------------------------
c17 FINISHED (Nothing in Clause 17 "exists" in terms of code.)
c18 <limits>, Note A
c19 Note A
c20 std_memory.h[20.4], rel_ops (should they be doc'd?), Note A
c21 Untouched, Note B
c22 Untouched
c23 See doxygroups.cc and Note B.
stl_alloc.h, stl_uninitialized.h remain from the common files.
c24 Untouched
c25 stl_tempbuf.h (small), stl_algo.h (big)
c26 <complex>, <valarray>, stl_numeric.h[26.4], Note A
c27 Untouched
backward/ Not scanned by doxygen. Should it be?
ext/ Untouched
__gnu_cxx Extensions such as verbose_terminate_handler are documented
but do not appear in output, since the __gnu_cxx namespace is
itself undocumented. Should it be? Eeeeeeehhh...
[1.3.5] "implementation-defined behavior: behavior ... that depends
on the implementation *and that each implementation shall
document*." [my emphasis] Not all implementation choices
have been thus described; doxygen is not necessarily the
appropriate place for such descriptions, either.
-----------------------------------------------------------
NOTES:
A) So far I have not tried to document any of the <c*> headers. So entities
such as atexit() are undocumented throughout the library.
B) Huge chunks of containers and strings are described in common "Tables"
in the standard. How to reproduce this information?
vim:ts=4:et:
|
