David Abrahams wrote:
on Sun Feb 22 2009, Stefan Seefeld <seefeld-AT-sympatico.ca> wrote:
Simonson, Lucanus J wrote: I would be interested to help get things up and running again, if people find it useful.
Hello?!? I can't believe Synopsis hasn't caught on among Boosters who use Doxygen -- I get the sense that nobody but me has even really tried it. It's got a real C++ parser under the hood, and it uses Boost.Wave, which means it can do stuff that others can't.
Indeed. But what's missing is what is usually missing... Someone to do the work do integrate it with the rest of the documentation chain and to make it "easy" for authors to use. But I see Simonson is starting to look into it.
I mean, c'mon, we have the developer right here in our midst! If something goes wrong he can fix it. It even has a mode that groks doxygen comment syntax; it should be a near drop-in replacement.
I do have one question about that... Why is it that having Stefan in Boost is an advantage in this case but having Volodya, Jurko, Noel, myself, and others with respect to bjam/build vs. cmake isn't an advantage? -- -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Redshift Software, Inc. - http://redshift-software.com -- rrivera/acm.org (msn) - grafik/redshift-software.com -- 102708583/icq - grafikrobot/aim,yahoo,skype,efnet,gmail