[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [lmi] Does doxygen's client-side search work?

From: Vadim Zeitlin
Subject: Re: [lmi] Does doxygen's client-side search work?
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2023 15:56:17 +0200

On Wed, 26 Apr 2023 03:07:22 +0000 Greg Chicares <gchicares@sbcglobal.net> 

GC> The lmi search box here:
GC>   https://www.nongnu.org/lmi/doxygen/
GC> doesn't work for me,

 It doesn't work because it relies on having JavaScript (and also CSS)
files on the server which are not found there. You need to copy at least
the following files there (as seen by opening the "Network" tab of the
"Developer Tools" in Firefox and looking at the failed requests:

- search.css
- searchdata.js
- search.js

 I think you should already have these files locally (I don't because we
use a custom theme and custom CSS for wx docs), so it should be enough to
just copy them to the server, but please let me know if I'm wrong.

 Note that are also some SVG files missing: mag_sel.svg and close.svg, they
must account for the missing "search" icon in the search field and you
should copy them too, even if this is mostly cosmetic.

GC> The wx search box here:
GC>   https://docs.wxwidgets.org/3.0/index.html
GC> doesn't work for me

 This is because it's generated with an old version of Doxygen which didn't
play well with our custom JS and I never bother to fix it. If you go to
https://docs.wxwidgets.org/3.2/index.html (generated with Doxygen 1.9.1),
you should be able to search there.

GC> Am I missing something obvious?

 I think it's just the missing files, and even if there are some other
problems, this would still be the first one to fix.

GC> Perhaps it would be better for lmi to set:
GC>   SEARCHENGINE           = NO
GC> because tools like git-grep and vim are probably
GC> better than doxygen's search.

 You'd think so, but from my personal experience, not being able to search
the docs was a very big problem for wx users, so I'd recommend fixing it if
it can be done easily.

GC> It's astonishing that wx's doxygen documentation
GC> is so good; I'd guess that the effort to produce
GC> and maintain it amounts to more than a person-year.

 Thanks, I'm afraid we don't spend nearly enough time/effort on it and I'm
aware of many, many places where it could and should be improved, but it's
still nice to hear good things about it.

 Good luck,

Attachment: pgpjO8pMvsHJJ.pgp
Description: PGP signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]