Add to Chrome
Add to Edge
Add to Firefox
Add to Opera
Add to Brave
Add to SafariWhen comparing Apiary vs Doxygen, the Slant community recommends Doxygen for most people. In the question“What are the best documentation tools for frameworks?” Doxygen is ranked 1st while Apiary is ranked 3rd.
Specs
Question Ranking
Pros
Pro Automatically generates API documentation
Apiary generates comprehensive HTML documentation based on your API routes.
Pro Type-level routes
Apiary provides type modeling, down to URL parameters, ensuring type safety.
Pro Free
Pro Generates documentation from comments
Doxygen can generate documentation from formatted comments in the source code. This is extremely useful when writing detailed man pages.
Pro Cross-platform
Doxygen is compatible with multiple languages. Including but not limited to: C, Objective-C, C#, C++, Java, Python, PHP etc...
Cons
Con Mediocre documentation
Users must rely primarily on the example project and auto-generated API documentation (Haddocks). The author of Apiary is not a native English speaker and openly acknowledges this issue.
Con i18n support is poor
Cannot work properly with non-ascii paths on Windows
Con PDF output is very problematic
Doxygen PDF output relies on the now broken LaTeX tabu package which was abandoned over a decade ago by its developer.
Con No recursive inclusion
For example, if you specify INCLUDE_PATH=incl, it doesn't search other folders included in the incl folder (incl/sub1 or incl/sub2) and there's no option to turn on recursive inclusion.
