Re: [Boost-users] Boost::Test Samples?

On Sun, Aug 7, 2011 at 6:37 AM, Ovanes Markarian wrote:

Hello *, below are my 5 cents regarding the docs and other points...

On Sun, Aug 7, 2011 at 8:41 AM, Gennadiy Rozental wrote:

...

Jeffrey Walton writes:

[...] I'm sorry you do not like the way documentation is structured. What would you prefer it to look like? which particular parts you find unclear?

The only point I can come up with, might be some shortcuts to recently used topics and these are:   - Runtime configuration parameters   - Testing tools. On the other hand I just did these 2 shortcuts in my browser.

...

...

The library is clearly abusing macros in a C++ library

Can you show me an example of this abuse? And how would achieve the same result without using them?

IMO there are none. And if the op dislikes macros he can really use the plain interface of the library which is also documented and supported ;)

...

...

(where are the predicates, functors, and other things I expect to see from a C++ library? Bjarne would probably chuckle or laugh).

I can't claim what Bjarne is doing or would do, but I did laugh when I read your statement above.

I can only support your statement, Gennadiy.

...

...

And the missing samples [broken links] are really not forgivable.

I did not look at docs for quite some time. It is indeed possible some links gone stale. I need to revive the toolchain we use to generate docs and I'll fix these.

I use the latest version and everything is documented well and all links I used to access were working fine. You guys are doing a great job. Pat yourselves on the back over a free beer.

Jeff