Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Problem with the documentation of Mesh_3 #7767

Closed
albert-github opened this issue Oct 9, 2023 · 4 comments · Fixed by #7768
Closed

Problem with the documentation of Mesh_3 #7767

albert-github opened this issue Oct 9, 2023 · 4 comments · Fixed by #7768

Comments

@albert-github
Copy link
Contributor

When looking at the documentation of Mesh_3 (https://cgal.geometryfactory.com/CGAL/Manual_doxygen_test/CGAL-6.0-I-80/master/Mesh_3/classCGAL_1_1Polyhedral__mesh__domain__with__features__3.html) we see that a lot of the documentation is duplicated e.g. (but there is more and it is also with the 1.8.13 and 1.9.6 runs)

image

image

I just looked at the detect_borders() ( as I saw here "Detects" and "detect" so easy search) and found these texts in:
Mesh_3/doc/Mesh_3/CGAL/Polyhedral_mesh_domain_with_features_3.h and Mesh_3/include/CGAL/Polyhedral_mesh_domain_with_features_3.h

Removing the comment from Mesh_3/include/CGAL/Polyhedral_mesh_domain_with_features_3.h already improved the situation, though I think the real problem is conceptual, we have double definitions of the functions (Mesh_3/doc/Mesh_3/CGAL/Polyhedral_mesh_domain_with_features_3.h and Mesh_3/include/CGAL/Polyhedral_mesh_domain_with_features_3.h) and both parts are added as input as part of the INPUT for doxygen, see also doc/Mesh_3/Doxyfile.in where quite a list of files is present.

@janetournois
Copy link
Member

All the duplicate definitions should have been removed from doc by PR #7445
Did something go wrong since then?

@albert-github
Copy link
Contributor Author

The PR #7445 indicates that the code in Mesh_3/doc/Mesh_3/CGAL/Polyhedral_mesh_domain_with_features_3.h should have been removed, I did a quick git log Mesh_3/doc/Mesh_3/CGAL/Polyhedral_mesh_domain_with_features_3.h but didn't find any indication of the PR #7445 and did some further investigations (I had a suspicion, don't know why but probably because it was very large and and a number of merges with the master, on which PR might cause the problem).
It looks like that #7395 is the culprit.

Commit: 46923342adcdbf31ae449487e7f7b5f49cb2d09d [4692334]
Parents: cdd4b2cc75, 93001308f4
Author: Laurent Rineau <laurent.rineau@cgal.org>
Date: Thursday, September 7, 2023 10:48:34 AM
Committer: Laurent Rineau
Merge pull request #7576 from albert-github/feature/issue_7395

issue #7395 Improvement of layout of model relations

as here there are 2 files added (and is very unlikely I would add files in the "kernel" of CGAL) i.e.

Mesh_3/doc/Mesh_3/CGAL/Polyhedral_mesh_domain_3.h
Mesh_3/doc/Mesh_3/CGAL/Polyhedral_mesh_domain_with_features_3.h

I locally removed these 2 files and ran the documentation build procedure on the Mesh_3 directory and the documentation looks OK (visual inspection). I also ran my link checker (that actually detected the problem) and also here I didn't see any problems regarding Mesh_3.

  • Should I make a PR removing these 2 files?

@janetournois
Copy link
Member

Sure, feel free to go ahead!
Thank you for the report and diagnostic

albert-github added a commit to albert-github/cgal that referenced this issue Oct 9, 2023
removing files that were removed by CGAL#7445 but reintroduced by CGAL#7395
@albert-github
Copy link
Contributor Author

I've just pushed a proposed patch, pull request #7768

@MaelRL MaelRL changed the title Problem with the documenation of Mesh_3 Problem with the documentation of Mesh_3 Oct 9, 2023
@MaelRL MaelRL linked a pull request Oct 9, 2023 that will close this issue
lrineau added a commit that referenced this issue Oct 16, 2023
issue #7767 Problem with the documenation of Mesh_3
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants