Douglas Gregor wrote:
On Wed, 2007-06-20 at 13:13 -0300, Matias Capeletto wrote:
* Support for code import. I will be very unhappy with out this feature. In the review of Boost.Bimap we find a lot of typos in docs examples. Every bit of code that appears in y docs now are in libs/bimap/example, and are tested with boost.build before I do any commit. You can not understand the value of this feature til you use it.
BoostBook actually has some support for literate programming, which is
It has? Darn! I didn't know that. Where can I know more about it? What we have now is reverse-lit. Dave has been advocating for a full-Lit which I havent' done yet (me slap in head!).
the opposite of the approach you're describing. Basically, you can name the code samples you write in BoostBook, then later on have it produce real example files by weaving together snippets of code with other support code. The Function library used this at one point to create its test suite (see libs/function/doc/tests.xml and libs/function/doc/tutorial.xml). But, without good integration into the build system, this feature never really got used.
Granted, I'm not recommending that you use this part of BoostBook...
Why? I can imagine exposing this part of the interface to quickbook somehow. Regards, -- Joel de Guzman http://www.boost-consulting.com http://spirit.sf.net