Re: [Boost-users] Boost.Test Documentation

"Uwe Schuster" wrote in message news:BFC1D03DDCEEE34D94D6DBCAF0C46A394CA0F6@KEMPMAIL.woodward.com...

...

-----Original Message----- From: boost-users-bounces@lists.boost.org [mailto:boost-users-bounces@lists.boost.org]On Behalf Of Gennadiy Rozental Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2007 5:39 AM To: boost-users@lists.boost.org Subject: Re: [Boost-users] Boost.Test Documentation

...

"Yann Golanski" wrote in message news:20070814084453.GB60576@kierun.org...

...

For example:

http://www.patmedia.net/~rogeeff/html/utf/user-guide/runtime-config/referenc...

...

In "report_level", the levels are indicated as no, confirm, short and detaled -- the latter should be details.

Actually it's "detailed". Fixed anyway

On this page (report_level) the "Command line argument name" seems to be wrong. Also on the "detect_memory_leak" page.

Fixed.

Why the list of parameters on the "Runtime parameters reference page" consists of the command line argument names? Shouldn't it be the full names instead?

These are their names. CLA just happend to coinside with them.