where to document functions in C

Question

I have a C program with multiple files, so I have, for example, stuff.c which implements a few functions, and stuff.h with the function prototypes. How should I go about documenting the functions in comments? Should I have all the docs in the header file, all the docs in the .c file, or duplicate the docs for both? I like the latter approach, but then I run into problems where I'll update the docs on one of them and not the other (usually the one where I make the first modification, i.e. if I modify the header file first, then its comments will reflect that, but if I update the implementation, only those comments will change).

Answer 1

It will often depend on what is set as the coding standard. Many people prefer to put the documentation in the .h file and leave the implementation in the .c file. Many IDE's with code completion will also pick up more easily on this rather than the documentation in the .c file.

But I think the major point in putting the documentation in the .h file deals with writing a library or assembly that will be shared with another program. Imagine that you're writing a .dll (or .so) that contains a component that you will be distributing. Other programmers will include your .h, but they often won't have (nor need) the implementation file behind it. In this case, documentation in the .h file is invaluable.

The same can be said when you're writing a class for use in the same program. If you're working with other programmers, most often those programmers are just looking at the header file for how to interact with your code rather than how the code is implemented. How it is implemented is not the concern of the person or code that will be using the component. So once again, documentation in the header will help that person or those people figure out how to use that code.

Answer 2

You should use a tool like doxygen, so the documentation is generated by specially crafted comments in your source code.

Answer 3

• Put the information that people using the functions need to know in the header.

• Put the information that maintainers of the functions need to know in the source code.

Answer 4

You could simply use Doxygen.. Also, you can look at this answer.

Answer 5

I've gone back and forth on this and eventually I settled on documentation in header files. For the vast majority of APIs in C/C++ you have access to the original header file and hence all of the comments that lie within [1]. Putting comments here maximizes the chance developers will see them.

I avoid duplication of comments between header and source files though (it just feels like a waste). It's really annoying when using Vim but most IDEs will pick up the header file comments and put them into things like intellisense or parameter help.

[1] Exceptions to this rule include generated header files from certain COM libraries.

Answer 6

Consider that it's possible for people to use these functions while only having the headers and a compiled version of the implementation. Make sure that anything necessary for using your functions is documented in the header. Implementation details can be documented in the source.

Answer 7

Definitely keep the docs in one place, to avoid the maintenance nightmare. You, personally, might be fastidious enough to keep two copies in sync, but the next person wont.

Use something like Doxygen to create a "pretty" version of the docs.

Answer 8

I like to follow the Google C++ Style Guide.

Which says:

Function Declarations

• Every function declaration should have comments immediately preceding it that describe what the function does and how to use it. These comments should be descriptive ("Opens the file") rather than imperative ("Open the file"); the comment describes the function, it does not tell the function what to do. In general, these comments do not describe how the function performs its task. Instead, that should be left to comments in the function definition.

Function Definitions

• Each function definition should have a comment describing what the function does and anything tricky about how it does its job. For example, in the definition comment you might describe any coding tricks you use, give an overview of the steps you go through, or explain why you chose to implement the function in the way you did rather than using a viable alternative. For instance, you might mention why it must acquire a lock for the first half of the function but why it is not needed for the second half.

  Note you should not just repeat the comments given with the function declaration, in the .h file or wherever. It's okay to recapitulate briefly what the function does, but the focus of the comments should be on how it does it.

Answer 9

The comments in the header vs. the implementation file should reflect the difference in how the two are used.

If you're going to create interface documentation (e.g., to be extracted with Doxygen, on the same general order as JavaDocs) that clearly belongs in the header. Even if you're not going to extract the comments to produce separate documentation, the same general idea applies -- comments that explain the interface/how to use the code, belong primarily or exclusively in the header.

Comments in the implementation should generally relate to the implementation. Contrary to frequent practice, rather than attempting to explain how things work, most should explain why particular decisions were made. This is especially true when you make decisions that make sense, but it might not be obvious that they do (e.g., noting that you did not use a Quicksort, because you need a stable sort).

Answer 10

It's simple really when you think about it.

The API docs absolutely must go in the header file. It's the header file that defines the external interface, so that's where the API docs go.

As a rule, implementation details should be hidden from API users. This includes documentation of implementation (except where it might affect the use e.g. time complexity etc). Thus implementation documentation should go in the implementation file.

Never ever duplicate documentation in multiple places. It will be unmaintainable and will be out of sync almost as soon as somebody has to change it.

Answer 11

I wrote a simple script that takes as input a template header-file with no function declarations and a source-code file with commented functions. The script extracts the commentary before a function definition from the source code file and writes it and the associated function declaration into an output header-file. This ensures that 1) there's only one place where function commentary needs to be written; and 2) the documentation in the header-file and the source code file always remain in sync. Commentary on the implementation of a function is put into the body of the function and is not extracted.