"Paul A Bristow" <pbristow@hetp.u-net.com> wrote in message news:003101c7ddc8$50ac1100$0400a8c0@hetp7...
1 First line 1 space indent is a bit odd - not enough to be a real indent. And anyway I don't think indents help! so I'd go for now indents.
Umm. Why? Isn't it kinda standard?
2 No icons for navigation - but perhaps they will appear when in the right place.
Yes they point to ../../..../doc/html/...
3 You must explain what a UTF is before using the acronym.
It is explained in first paragraphs of user's guide.
4 No Last revised date. This should be added to the TOC automatically?
No. It should work onceI put it under source control
5 The minimal testing facility supplies it's own ... should its ( it isn't it is, is it!)
Sorry, I a bit lost in these "it" and "is". What did you mean?
6 The code block backgroun in is too dark (and the code font a bit small too).
The code will change to match what IBD comes up with.
7 I would break up the code and 'inline' the comments. It makes it much more difficult to read having to go down to (1), and then (2) ... But I'm sure you're tired now ;-) But for future reference... (using the code blocks syntax for the code) For example:
// seven ways to detect and report the same error:
BOOST_CHECK( add( 2,2 ) == 4 ); // continues on error
displays an error message (by default on std::cout) that includes the expression that failed, the source file name, and the source file line number. It also increments an error count. At program termination, the error count will be displayed automatically by the Unit Test Framework.
BOOST_REQUIRE( add( 2,2 ) == 4 ); // throws on error
similar to approach #1, except that after displaying the error, an exception is thrown, to be caught by the Unit Test Framework. This approach is suitable when writing a explicit test program, and the error would be so severe as to make further testing impractical. BOOST_REQUIRE differs from the C++ Standard Library's assert() macro in that it is always generated, and channels error detection into the uniform Unit Test Framework reporting procedure.
...
Since this section is what most people want to start with, it would be worth splitting it up?
This is not how DocBook based documentation look like usually. Callouts are located after the source code.
8 Mention pre-built libraries - bjam never works first time :-(
Were? Can you provide exact wording?
9 Admonishment Important duplicates on Standalone library compilation.
Which page? I do not see it.
10 It would help if you said in the Including the UTF directly into your test module section that recompilation will *slow down* your 'compile, run, crash' cycle ;-)
I kinda saidit with last statement isn't it? The thing is it's not that significant this days to emphsise it too much.
11 It didn't quickly see the thing I need most, most often - a list of the macros
BOOST_CHECK ...
Eventually I found 'The UTF testing tools reference' but only by accident !
How do you propose I should make it easier to find? It's testing tools reference section.
12 You could help the ignorant (eg me) with a link
[@http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buridan's_ass Buridan's donkey]
OK
13 MS .net specific "jump through these errors using usual keyboard shortcuts/mouse clicks you use for compilation error annalists" Spelling mistake 'analysis'
fixed
14 You've shown using a Post-Build step, but say Use Custom build step.
I find Thorsten's Custom build step method convenient too with just
"$(TargetDir)\$(TargetName).exe"
and c:\autorun as the mythical filename.
This re-runs, even if not rebuilt.
But perhaps there are advantages to the post-build method too?
I find that these are rather important convenience features allowing a rapid run/test cycle.
I did not play with that one, it's in my TODO list.
15 Test progress display is blank. TODO?
Yep. R u up to it?
16 I don't like the output in white on black, but taste in 'color' is *very* subjective - and some people have no taste at all ;-)
I wanted to mimic regular shell window output
17 YOC pages has a number of footnotes/callouts [1] [2] ... but they appear to be orphans - but contain interesting info and the links are missing.
Yeah. Some bug in BoostBook. Did not figure it out yet. Looks like they are all on front page.
18 Finally IMO it badly needs an index - but we have yet to devise a good method of automatically indexing Quickbook docs.
Yeah. I am thinking about it. I don't use Quickbook though. Gennadiy