Daniel Wirtz

Hey Maxime,
well those commands are purely doxygen-related and probably require a concurrent version; i would not expect any other difficulties with those commands in connection with mtoc++.
However, if you have reason to believe it might be caused by mtoc++, please send us some more details, logs etc.
Thanks, Daniel

Dear Aurelien,
thanks for your detailed feedback!

1) Your pointer lead me to a bugfix due to a wrong argument type call of MatlabDocMaker.create; however, with the previous FEX version I could reproduce exactly your claimed error.

2) This has been already reported and i've included a bugfix in my local version but didn't get around to publish it yet.

3) in fact, this is a purely doxygen related issue; it tries to interpret \archives and \seiscreen as commands, which it not knows and thus gives you a warning. the reason for the mangled line numbers is the mtoc++ filter, as the backup_seiscreen.m ist filtered (that is what mtoc++ actually does) and thus gets new line numbers; the line numbers in the warnings log of doxygen are taken from the processed files. there is generally no way of keeping those line numbers matching.

4) please read the comments below regarding the call graph. this is a feature we explicitly do not support, as mtoc++ merely transforms the syntax and not the semantics into c-compliant form. thus, function calls from within method bodies or scripts will most likely not be detected by doxygen.
A correct processing of code in order to reveal the complete call graph would require cross-file parsing at the filter level already, which we will, truth spoken, probably not implement due to the little use for our own applications and time constraints.

5) well, i'm having trouble understanding your troubles with this regard. i've rephrased some of the sentences, but essentially all you need to do is to ensure that all relevant binaries can be found on the windows PATH. that involves operating knowledge of both windows and the involved 3rd party tools, mainly doxygen. we see this as a requirement and just provide the necessary hints.

6) Yes, the last time i've updated the FEX submission i did not update the downloads on our documentation site; my apologies for that.

finally, i've submitted an all-current version to FEX this morning and also updated the documentation and downloads on www.morepas.org.
I'd be happy to get to know if those updates successfully addressed your issues.

regards,
Daniel

Hey Arnold,
unfortunately i do not have 2012b yet, so i haven't tested it with that version.
However, i figured that the critical point in formatting is the tab character equivalent in whitespaces, this setting somehow seems to be different amongst platforms/matlab versions.
I've submitted an updated version with improved autodetection of that constant.
see if this solves your issue, and if not, could you send me a private message with the generated output and commands you used?
thanks!

hi, thank you for your response.

the \cond and \endcond commands work fine when they are in the description of the function.

When they are used in the code, in order to exclude some part of the code, they don't work.

Here is a simple example, where i don't want to show the lines between \cond and \endcond in the generated code.

function [c] = sumM(a,b)
% sum function
%
% sum function detail description.
%
% Parameters:
% a : first data of type double
% b : second data of type double
%
% Return values:
% c : sum of a and b

% comment
c = a + b;

% \cond
% dummy code to exclude from the documentation
disp('function is ok')
% \endcond

I think that mtoc++ should analyse wether a commented line in the code begins with some special commands. Or maybe i don't use correctly your (great !!) tool.

Thank you !

Maxime

Hi,

Great job, and thank you for the last updates which make possible to include code and dependencies graphs !!

I would like now to use the special command \cond and \endcond to exclude some part of the code to the documentation.

I didn't succeded ; do you think it possible ? How should i do that ?

Thank you,

Maxime