On 9 March 2010 10:11, Paul A. Bristow <pbristow@hetp.u-net.com> wrote:
This is fine - as far as it goes - but it could use a lot of comments to explain to the non-cognoscenti what is going on.
Really, do feel free to make changes.
But it's very far from the Full Monty with all the tricks of the trade (black arts!) to get the benefit from the full Doxygen and code snippets (not to mention indexing - pioneered by John Maddock but not quite working well yet).
It's meant to be for getting started. It shouldn't be too complicated. And certainly not based on anything that isn't ready. I can't write much about doxygen as I don't actually use it. Code snippets would probably be best left for a further example.
Making the documentation process slicker could be a GSoC project? Perhaps improving the documentation for some existing Boost libraries (s) en route might be good too.
This kind of thing might be better done outside of boost, our tools tend to be too focused on our own needs. For example, one of clang's open projects is to implement a code documentation tool. Daniel