hi beman,
documentation the documentation in general is pretty short, but sufficient: the concepts of the library are easy, so there is no need to go into more details. however i would prefer if the documentation uses quickbook/boostbook. most of the recent boost libraries have a very similar layout of the documentation, but the boost.endian docs do not follow these conventions.
quickbook/boostbook has matured, so I'll take a look. But no promises.
also the docs for `conversion functions' and for `integer types' are separate. personally i'd prefer if they could go into the same document, maybe having a structure like: introduction, integer types, conversion functions, examples, reference
A lot depends on what the conversion functions look like coming out of the review. It may make sense to integrate them much more tightly, but again, no promises.
(preferably doxygen-generated).
I'm not a fan of doxygen.
well, one may like doxygen or not, i am not a big fan of doxygen, either. but it still generates a reasonably good documentation with cross-references and the like. one other point ... the help file seems to directly link to the c++ headers. this should be changed: * some browsers (at least chromium) will not display the header when clicking the link, but will save them on disk. * providing a direct link to the source code from the docs implies that the user will get some information that are necessary to use the library by reading the sources. imo, this is not the case for using boost.endian. * if a user opens integer.hpp, the first 60 lines just contain copyright, some historical notes, compiler-specific stuff, includes and ifdefs. imo, this is the implementation part, which should not be exposed to a user. so i'd suggest to completely remove the links to the c++ headers. cheers, tim