[erlang-questions] Erl_Docgen vs EDoc - when to use both?
Thu Dec 17 00:30:11 CET 2015
Both application Erl_Docgen and EDoc applications provide mechanisms
to extract the documentation information from the modules. However
when processed they do not have a common layout.
HTML files generated using EDoc have direct links to the type
definitions facilitating the navigation when the information is spread
across modules. Erl_Docgen have a tool to extract the information
first as xml file to later on transform it to html files. However
Erl_Docgen does not provide the direct links but just information
about where (which module) to look for the type definition (with a
normal text see....). I.e. looks like to use Edoc is much better than
On the other hand the structure of html files from both applications
do not correspond to a common documentation structure (and the
internal html code is not compatible). Erl_Docgen generates the same
look like as the standard documentation. Very good to facilitate the
navigation between release notes, reference manuals and user guides.
However EDoc is more oriented to a specific structure lead by one
"overview" application central point. I.e. looks like to use
Erl_Docgen would be recommendable.
So here the question: Is there any strategy to allow to mix the
results of both tools so we can get the best of both?
I would be pleased to be wrong and overlook some informationon in the
documentation. Do not hesitate to correct me.
Best Regards / Borja
More information about the erlang-questions