docs: fix missing docs for OIIO:attribute() and OIIO::getattribute()
#4987
Conversation
Rearrangements in 3.1 dropped the list of recognized attributes and failed to document the span varieties. We fix and also reword a lot of the descriptions for clarity and uniformity. Signed-off-by: Larry Gritz <lg@larrygritz.com>
jessey-git
left a comment
jessey-git
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah, alright, it was the @defgroup setup that was missed. Good to know.
That's not quite it, actually. The previous organization was that there were several varieties of What really happened is that in the header, I made the new span-based version the "flagship" one with the full explanation, but I neglected to reference it in the docs, so the long description disappeared. I could have fixed by just adding refs to the new functions to the docs, as I originally meant to. But while I was there, I took the opportunity to surround the whole collection with a group marker, and then include the lot of them with a single reference to the group, rather than need to refer to each function variant individually. |
…()` (AcademySoftwareFoundation#4987) Rearrangements in 3.1 dropped the list of recognized attributes from the visible online docs and failed to document the span varieties. We fix and also reword a lot of the descriptions for clarity and uniformity. The previous organization was that there were several varieties of attribute(). In the header, the first one had the overall long explanation, including the list of all the recognized attributes. The other ones had short explanations of how they differed. In the docs, each one was referenced explicitly, pulling in its attendant bit of documentation. What really happened is that in the header, I made the new span-based version the "flagship" one with the full explanation, but I neglected to reference it in the docs, so the long description disappeared. I could have fixed by just adding refs to the new functions to the docs, as I originally meant to. But while I was there, I took the opportunity to surround the whole collection with a group marker, and then include the lot of them with a single reference to the group, rather than need to refer to each function variant individually. And while I was at it, I also reworded (and hopefully improved) some of those explanations. Signed-off-by: Larry Gritz <lg@larrygritz.com>
2 participants
Rearrangements in 3.1 dropped the list of recognized attributes and failed to document the span varieties. We fix and also reword a lot of the descriptions for clarity and uniformity.