Adding basic RST support to doxypypy

[raspyThomas]

Main change for this pull request is adding basic RST syntax support to doxygen. That way it should be possible to use standard RST Doc Strings understood by e.g. PyCharm and others. (Sphinx like Doc Strings) With doxypypy they can be converted to a style doxygen can handle.

Besides this there are smaller additions of optional features:

• Reducing indent depth in output to a similar level original DocString have, especially in deeply nested DocStrings. -> option -e
• Shifting decorators back to their definition line, however this is currently still rather not yet usefull as long as doxygen won't integrate them into their documentation output. -> option -k
• line ending detection based on git checkout option (git for windows allows checkouts with linux or windows style line endings) -> only for source code based unittests

note: i'm not that used to git and git hub usage. -> Is it better to split such smaller changes on the way up into similar small pull requests?

[Feneric]

I see what you're doing here. Normally it is better to try and work these in as smaller chunks. Let's try it though and see what feedback we get. I'm hoping to get an updated Python package in the not-too-distant future but we can experiment a little until then.

[raspyThomas]

Thanks for hinting me in the right git direction. Do you have any direct experiments in your mind?

[Feneric]

I see Sphinx-like doc strings beyond simple RST as being experimental. I'm not opposed to having it in there as I believe a lot of folks will find it useful, but it's a bit of a stretch for doxypypy. The original intent of doxypypy after all was to make it so that we wouldn't have to put markup in docstrings. Basic RST fits this concept totally, but arguably more complex RST breaks this mold a bit.

Smaller just means it's easier for me to read and grok and test. The smaller the change the smaller the time-slice required for me to get it merged. My time has been pretty restricted lately. I'm on holiday right now though so was able to get this in. I've got some minor changes to improve testing that I've got just about ready to merge in as well.

[raspyThomas]

Yes it surely is experimental, especially as it is far away from supporting a complete RST style. Actually it is just born out of the need for working on IDEs and using doxypypy with doxygen at the same time. However there's no clean design plan or anything like that. There's just that RST parts in it, i have used in this project, nothing more and there might be RST style parts which are not correctly translated for now. So I totally understand your thoughts on keep it simple is often better.

Thus if complete RST support is wanted -> using sphinx should be fine. And if doxygen is the target, then Markdown and Doxygen-Style should be fine too.

In the end, i can offer further work / bug fixings on these RST parts, if you find it usefull. Otherwise if RST is not that good fitting, i'm fine if those RST parts are removed again. (I can remove them as well if wanted.) Anyway i'm glad you still have some time to work on doxypypy.