Top Qs
Timeline
Chat
Perspective

Comparison of documentation generators

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Remove ads

The following tables compare general and technical information for a number of documentation generators. Please see the individual products' articles for further information. Unless otherwise specified in footnotes, comparisons are based on the stable versions without any add-ons, extensions or external programs. Note that many of the generators listed are no longer maintained.

General information

Summarize
Perspective

Basic general information about the generators, including: creator or company, license, and price.

More information Name, Creator ...
Remove ads

Supported formats

Summarize
Perspective

The output formats the generators can write.

More information Generator name, HTML ...
Remove ads

Other features

More information possibility of extended customization, generated diagrams ...
Remove ads

See also

Notes

  1. Ddoc has a macro system which can be customized to output any desired format. CHM, groff (manpages), XHTML, XML, and LaTeX (so PostScript and PDF) were tested. They are not currently included in the standard distribution. Standard HTML output also is generated using macros and can be redefined.
  2. Though not officially supported as an output format, Epydoc uses LaTeX and PostScript as intermediate steps to produce the final PDF documentation.
  3. Via Doclets from Third Parties.
  4. RDoc currently only provides generators for CHM and XML documents in the RDoc version provided as part of the Ruby 1.9 Core.
  5. RDoc generates documentation for RI, which is Ruby's version of the Unix man pages.
  6. Generated from the LaTeX output only
Remove ads

References

Loading related searches...

Wikiwand - on

Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.

Remove ads