On Jul 18, 2008, at 11:41 AM, Gennadiy Rozental wrote:
David Abrahams <dave <at> boostpro.com> writes:
on Fri Jul 18 2008, "Leo Moisio" <leo.moisio-AT-gmail.com> wrote:
The documentation for Boost.Test on boost.org seems very outdated,
I find that situation to be almost intolerable. I realize not everyone will agree with me, but IMO if a library's documentation cannot be kept up to date, the changes to the library code (and maybe the library itself) don't belong in Boost.
The situation is indeed dare. I gave a shot couple time to syncing docs, but it seems to require even more efforts. The biggest hurdle for me is that it doesn't seem like anyone support Boostbook. At least my question/change suggestion were never answered. And I do need to make changes to be able to check in my code. Making changes to BoostBook is not a simple task and required a significant investment of time and efforts for me.
Could you at least add Doxygen comments for all the public macros (and other items)? Marco comments can go right before the macro, just like functions and types. However, if a macro's definition is conditional, maybe you should delay the documentation until after the definition. Look at BOOST_PRIVATE_WILD_ASSERT in <http:// svn.boost.org/svn/boost/sandbox/old_dlwalker_stuff/boost/math/ big_radix_whole_core.hpp> for an example of the latter. -- Daryle Walker Mac, Internet, and Video Game Junkie darylew AT hotmail DOT com