[Monetdb-developers] mx tool status and future
Greetings. I understand, that this issue was probably discussed before, but I couldn't quite find a way to search the list archive. It appears to me, that mx version 3, found on savannah.nongnu.org, is somewhat out of sync with the one used for monetdb (@mal and @include tags are not supported by it; adding the former was trivial, while I've set the later to no-op, as included *.mx files are nowhere to be found in the monetdb source tree). The mx doc formatter itself is also quite underdeveloped, compared to what we came to expect from systems like doxygen or sphinx. In light of the above, I wonder, are there any plans to switch to a different code documentation system (doxygen?) or is the mx tool intended for future development?
On 26-05-2010 23:37:34 -0700, Alex Dubov wrote:
Greetings.
I understand, that this issue was probably discussed before, but I couldn't quite find a way to search the list archive.
It appears to me, that mx version 3, found on savannah.nongnu.org, is somewhat out of sync with the one used for monetdb (@mal and @include tags are not supported by it; adding the former was trivial, while I've set the later to no-op, as included *.mx files are nowhere to be found in the monetdb source tree). The mx doc formatter itself is also quite underdeveloped, compared to what we came to expect from systems like doxygen or sphinx.
I can't find mx on savannah.nongnu.org, do you have a direct link? I'd say that we don't develop that version, but maybe someone forked an old version at some time.
In light of the above, I wonder, are there any plans to switch to a different code documentation system (doxygen?) or is the mx tool intended for future development?
Mx is mainly in use because of its macro expansion IMO. We're moving away from putting end-user documentation in the Mx-files. That said, it is much more favourable to use plain C-files when Mx macros aren't strictly necessary IMO.
the mx code is old and the version you mentiom even more. Mx will
remain used in the forseeable future
regards martin
On 27 mei 2010, at 08:37, Alex Dubov
Greetings.
I understand, that this issue was probably discussed before, but I couldn't quite find a way to search the list archive.
It appears to me, that mx version 3, found on savannah.nongnu.org, is somewhat out of sync with the one used for monetdb (@mal and @include tags are not supported by it; adding the former was trivial, while I've set the later to no-op, as included *.mx files are nowhere to be found in the monetdb source tree). The mx doc formatter itself is also quite underdeveloped, compared to what we came to expect from systems like doxygen or sphinx.
In light of the above, I wonder, are there any plans to switch to a different code documentation system (doxygen?) or is the mx tool intended for future development?
--- --- --- ---------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ Monetdb-developers mailing list Monetdb-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/monetdb-developers
Alex, there is only one "authorized" Mx tool for MonetDB and that is the one that is available from the MonetDB repository at http://dev.monetdb.org/hg/MonetDB/ We (at least) I am not aware of any Mx tool at savannah.nongnu.org, and I don't think this is "our" Mx tool --- I cannot even find it there; could you please point us directly to it? Apart from that, we use Mx as is and do neither plan to extend nor to replace it in the near future. The former is not our prime concern, the latter is hardly possible, as the whole MonetDB code base uses mainly the macro expansion features of Mx (not only its code documentation features), and (at least for the time being) we consider it too much work to replace Mx by some other macro expansion language. Stefan ps: Mx (and the complete MonetDB "buildtools") are only required if you compile MonetDB using the plain sources from our Mercurial repository; all provided tarball contain Mx-generated code and hence don't require our buildtools (incl. Mx). See also http://monetdb.cwi.nl/Download/ On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 11:37:34PM -0700, Alex Dubov wrote:
Greetings.
I understand, that this issue was probably discussed before, but I couldn't quite find a way to search the list archive.
It appears to me, that mx version 3, found on savannah.nongnu.org, is somewhat out of sync with the one used for monetdb (@mal and @include tags are not supported by it; adding the former was trivial, while I've set the later to no-op, as included *.mx files are nowhere to be found in the monetdb source tree). The mx doc formatter itself is also quite underdeveloped, compared to what we came to expect from systems like doxygen or sphinx.
In light of the above, I wonder, are there any plans to switch to a different code documentation system (doxygen?) or is the mx tool intended for future development?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ Monetdb-developers mailing list Monetdb-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/monetdb-developers
-- | Dr. Stefan Manegold | mailto:Stefan.Manegold@cwi.nl | | CWI, P.O.Box 94079 | http://www.cwi.nl/~manegold/ | | 1090 GB Amsterdam | Tel.: +31 (20) 592-4212 | | The Netherlands | Fax : +31 (20) 592-4199 |
participants (4)
-
Alex Dubov -
Fabian Groffen -
Martin Kersten -
Stefan Manegold