more documentation, including for all modv files

[jbathegit]

I know this is a lot of files, but it's all documentation enhancements, and more than half of the changed files are modv files which only define a single global parameter and thus are very short in length.

What's particularly neat about this commit is that I figured out how to implement the Doxygen @var tag, which creates a global reference to a particular variable name and also generates very nicely-formatted tables for modules. For examples of what this looks like in Doxygen, see my sample web site at https://emc.ncep.noaa.gov/emc/pages/infrastructure/bufrlib_jeff/html/index.html, then click on the "Files" tab, then click on some of the changed files such as cfe.h, moda_bitmaps.F, moda_tababd.F, or any of the modv_*.F files. All variables defined by these @var tags also end up getting added to a master global catalog, which you can see if you go to the "Main Page" tab, then click on "Data Types List", then click on "Data Fields", then click either "All" or "Variables".

Let me know if any questions - thanks!

[jbathegit]

BTW, in all of the modv_*.F files, I also swapped the order of the STATIC and DYNAMIC allocation declarations. I did this because Doxygen only displays the last one, and I wanted the DYNAMIC declarations to be the ones that get displayed on the web site. But there are no actual changes to functionality.

[edwardhartnett]

Neat! You are becoming quite the doxygen expert! At some point I would like to have you take a look at what we are doing in UFS_UTILS so we can sync up our newfound doxygen knowledge. (This is the first time I've ever used it so extensively with Fortran code.)

I will review. Thanks for isolating the doxygen changes, because primarily what I look for in the review are accidentally changed lines of code.

What you say about static vs. dynamic is interesting. I will take a look...

[edwardhartnett]

OK, for static vs. dynamic, what is happening is that whatever macro is applied in the build that is running doxygen is used.

However it's also clear that we need to eliminate what you are calling the static build. It's archaic and adds needless complexity.

[jbathegit]

Yes, we've had this discussion before, and we still have an open issue for this in #77. As noted there, I do agree that we should be able to eliminate the static memory builds as part of a future release of the library. My plan is to do this not in the next 11.4.0 release, but rather in the next one after that.

[jbathegit]

@edwardhartnett do you have any other questions/concerns about this PR? If not, could you please approve it for merging? (Thanks! ;-)