[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Qemu-devel] Sphinx for QEMU docs? (and a doc-comment format questio
From: |
Emilio G. Cota |
Subject: |
Re: [Qemu-devel] Sphinx for QEMU docs? (and a doc-comment format question) |
Date: |
Tue, 8 Nov 2016 00:02:42 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) |
On Mon, Nov 07, 2016 at 15:03:23 +0000, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 5 November 2016 at 18:42, Peter Maydell <address@hidden> wrote:
> > With a little luck I may be able to put something up
> > on Monday as a sort of minimal-demonstration of how
> > this would look in QEMU.
>
> Generated documentation:
> http://people.linaro.org/~peter.maydell/sphinx/index.html
> Git branch with the patches needed to produce that:
> https://git.linaro.org/people/peter.maydell/qemu-arm.git sphinx-docs
> Pointy-clicky interface to git branch:
> https://git.linaro.org/people/peter.maydell/qemu-arm.git/log/?h=sphinx-docs
>
> I didn't bother to write the makefile changes to tie it into
> the main build process, so to regenerate the docs locally you'll
> need to run
> sphinx-build -b html docs my-build-dir/docs
> from the QEMU source tree root, which will put the output into
> my-build-dir/docs, which you can then point your web browser at.
I moved qht's documentation to this to see how hard it was.
Was trivial to do! The result looks very nice.
Patches here:
- Web: https://github.com/cota/qemu/tree/sphinx-docs
- Git: https://github.com/cota/qemu.git sphinx-docs
> The overall organisation structure needs some thought --
> I think we should at least separate into user/ for user
> docs and dev/ for internals docs (and only install the
> user/ docs).
Agreed.
> The branch above just puts the two example
> docs directly into the index.rst for demo purposes.
>
> Conclusions from this exercise:
> 1) conversion isn't all that difficult, and the results
> look pretty nice
> 2) some of the doc-comment format differences are irritating:
> . "function - short description" not "function: short description"
> . "&struct.fieldname" not "address@hidden"
> . "&typename" not "#typename"
> 3) the most awkward part of kernel-doc syntax is that it bakes
> in the kernel's style choice of always using "struct foo"
> for types -- I don't think there's any way to document
> 'MemoryRegion' and 'AddressSpace' without the 'struct'
> coming out in the documentation output.
>
> We could fix (2) by loosening the kernel-doc script's
> parsing if we were happy to carry around a forked version
> of it. Fixing (3) requires more serious surgery on kernel-doc
> I suspect.
FWIW I'd prefer to strictly adhere to kerneldoc as is. Converting
the existing kerneldocs will require some supervision, anyway.
E.
- Re: [Qemu-devel] Sphinx for QEMU docs? (and a doc-comment format question), (continued)
- Re: [Qemu-devel] Sphinx for QEMU docs? (and a doc-comment format question), Peter Maydell, 2016/11/07
- Re: [Qemu-devel] Sphinx for QEMU docs? (and a doc-comment format question), Paolo Bonzini, 2016/11/07
- Re: [Qemu-devel] Sphinx for QEMU docs? (and a doc-comment format question), Peter Maydell, 2016/11/07
- Re: [Qemu-devel] Sphinx for QEMU docs? (and a doc-comment format question), Paolo Bonzini, 2016/11/07
- Re: [Qemu-devel] Sphinx for QEMU docs? (and a doc-comment format question), Peter Maydell, 2016/11/07
- Re: [Qemu-devel] Sphinx for QEMU docs? (and a doc-comment format question), Paolo Bonzini, 2016/11/07
- Re: [Qemu-devel] Sphinx for QEMU docs? (and a doc-comment format question), Peter Maydell, 2016/11/07
Re: [Qemu-devel] Sphinx for QEMU docs? (and a doc-comment format question),
Emilio G. Cota <=