BLAS, LAPACK: Refactor comments for FORD compatibility #786
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Thanks @jvdp1 @gareth-nx for the approvals: I will wait for the checks and then merge, as this is just a cosmetic change. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
In this PR I've:
interface/subroutine/function!> NAME:comments that would otherwise be parsed by FORD as commandsFORD can now process all BLAS/LAPACK files properly (tested locally).
However, the process is still lengthy due to the large number of procedure (and ~0.6M lines of code added).
So, I think the idea of PR #784 still applies