Doxygen or gtk-doc?

[Enrique Arizon Benito <earizon unizar es>]

Hi, I was looking for an automated tool to document gtk+ source code. I 
was thinking on Doxygen, similar to the JavaDoc I'm used to, but 
searching on the net I found gtk-doc looks to be the prefered tool to 
document gtk projects. Unfortunately the gtk-doc on itself looks to be 
bad documented (I just found some man pages on the net and a few short 
examples to use in Makefile.in. Even RedHat 9 is preinstaled with an old 
gtk-doc version with no man pages). On the opposite the Doxygen project 
is well known on the GNU world and offers me great confidence.
 That's not to say that I consider gtk-doc to be bad. I just heard of 
it a few days ago, I'm not used to it and I've found no docs. with the 
named exceptions. Can someone guide me to choose one of those tools?. 
What advantages gtk-doc offers over Doxygen when the source is gtk+ code 
(plain C, not C++)?

 Another doubt arise when I see the http://cvs.gnome.org. While it now 
offers just LXR and Bonsai front-end to the code, is it planned to offer 
a third gtk-doc/Doxygen/... front-end in a future?.

Thanks in advance for any help!

   Enrique Arizón Benito,

   Software developer and Network Administrator