Re: UML as documentation [Re: gtk-doc vs Doxygen results]

[Lars Clausen <lrclause cs uiuc edu>]

On 8 Sep 2003, Alan Horkan wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 1 Sep 2003, Enrique Arizon Benito wrote:
>
>> Date: Mon, 01 Sep 2003 19:27:12 +0200
>> From: Enrique Arizon Benito <earizon@unizar.es>
>> Reply-To: dia-list@gnome.org
>> To: dia-list@gnome.org
>> Subject: gtk-doc vs Doxygen results
>>
>> Two weeks ago I wrote asking for some particular system used for
>> documenting dia source code (Doxygen or similar tool).
>
> This got me thinking that UML diagrams of the Dia code would be pretty
> cool documentation.

I've hacked a little on that, but get distracted by easily fixable bugs
every time:)

> [Like as if anyone ever design the complete system in UML in advance!  my
> lecturer let the cat out of the bag that most projects he had known
> generated the UML aftet the fact and used it largely as documentation,
> but still comparing it to even a partial original design would be useful,
> or it would help future restructuring.]

*grin*  That's interesting -- I usually use it as an informal technique on
blackboards to just toss around ideas.

> Has anyone ever run autodia on Dia itself?
>
> Granted it might not look pretty without significant layout work but it
> might be interesting and form both a useful example to work from and
> serve as documentation.

Idon't think Autodia handles Dias ad-hoc OO code very well.

-Lars

-- 
Lars Clausen (http://shasta.cs.uiuc.edu/~lrclause)| HĂ„rdgrim of Numenor
"I do not agree with a word that you say, but I   |----------------------------
will defend to the death your right to say it."   | Where are we going, and
    --Evelyn Beatrice Hall paraphrasing Voltaire  | what's with the handbasket?