CSF does not fit 100% with [insert language], why?
– CSF is supposed to be general enough to accomodate several languages. As C, C++ and Java were the first languages considered and chosen, they have of course left their mark on CSF. This was more visible in the older version of CSF, while the newer version of CSF is much more general and can serve the needs of more languages. • Are there any disadvantages with using a compiler front-end? – Yes. Several limitations of this approach became visible when using Cppp [which is now no longer part of the source-tree]. The biggest problem is complexity, as it can be rather complex to dive into the trees to get info. Some info may not be in the trees semantic processing. Among them is the name of arguments in your function declarations, though the names of arguments in the definition is available (and are used) in the argument scope. And you can’t document macros in C/C++ for obvious reasons (this can be solved easily by adding a primitive pre-processor). But you get full access to the code and
