On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 3:43 PM, Paul A. Bristow <pbristow@hetp.u-net.com> wrote:
This looks a lot better, but I would err on the side of even more caution and build the tests and the documentation as you go along, so the docs and tests are also your primary deliverables for boost::matrix base container class for 2-dimensional matrices.
I have a habbit of writing unit tests after interface but before implementation. As for documentation it will generally be written on the go.
But I can see that you will need things like operator<< to do testing.
I see no problem here :)
The reason for this is that getting the idiosyncratic Boost test and doc system will cause you some (much?) trouble to get going, but without them, the code itself will be very much less valuable because it won't be reviewable, or even not usable.
I don't see what problem is there with Boost.Test -- I used it a lot recently for unit testing my own project. As far as documentation goes, I only know the basics of QuickBook though.
I would strongly encourage you to use Quickbook to generate Boostbook and Doxygen with auto-doc, and John Maddock's indexing system too. This is hard work to set up and get going, but IMO the results are well worth it.
I'm a big fan of doxygen, and usually comment before coding. As for the rest of the tools I'll need to take a look.
(I am working on a 'boilerplate' to help ease this painful process - ask when you are starting?)
That doesn't depend on me :).
PS I would suggest NOT wasting your very limited time worrying about obsolete compilers - concentrate ton recent gcc and MSVC 9 SP1 - and ask for help from the Boost list with other recent less-popular compilers (unless you are already using them).
I 'd really count on that. As for compilers I have immidate access only to GCC 4.4 and 4.3 on Linux, and GCC 4.3, MSVC 8 & 9 on Windows. -- regards, Kornel Kisielewicz