[test] documentatation on patmedia.net disappeared, not up to date on boost.org
The documentation for Boost.Test on boost.org seems very outdated, but there has been a much more up to date documentation available on http://www.patmedia.net/~rogeeff/html/utf/user-guide.html However it disappeared yesterday or day before that, and I can't find any mirrors anywhere. I'd really like to have this documentation available again. Leo Moisio
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The documentation for Boost.Test on boost.org seems very outdated,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. -- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com
On Jul 18, 2008, at 6:59 AM, David Abrahams wrote:
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The documentation for Boost.Test on boost.org seems very outdated,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 OP mentioned that there's an archive out there with more up-to- date documentation, but the author hasn't copied it over to our repository yet. Well, right now I would be satisfied with adding Doxygen blocks to every public macro (or other item) as a work-around (or substitute/enhancement). Said instruction should include what supplemental headers are needed to enable the macro. (Or the author can just include those headers automatically so users don't have to worry about it.) -- Daryle Walker Mac, Internet, and Video Game Junkie darylew AT hotmail DOT com
David Abrahams wrote:
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The documentation for Boost.Test on boost.org seems very outdated,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.
I agree. --Beman
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The documentation for Boost.Test on boost.org seems very outdated,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. Gennadiy
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
Daryle Walker <darylew <at> hotmail.com> writes:
Could you at least add Doxygen comments for all the public macros
I don't like doxigen approach to library documentation. In any case it's no better than just checking in html. Gennadiy
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 check in html documentation only, without sources? Between, there is no documentation sources neither in 1.35 nor in trunk, and there was no complains about that AFAIK. Also, plain html conforms documentation guidelines at http://www.boost.org/development/requirements.html#Documentation
-----Original Message----- From: boost-bounces@lists.boost.org [mailto:boost-bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Gennadiy Rozental Sent: 23 July 2008 18:38 To: boost@lists.boost.org Subject: Re: [boost] [test] documentatation on patmedia.net disappeared,not up to date on boost.org
Could you at least check in html documentation only, without
Ilya Sokolov <fal_delivery <at> mail.ru> writes: sources?
I think I'll do just this.
OK - this is a great help - but long-term can we find someone who is willing to rewrite the whole document in Quickbook? GSoC person perhaps? Someone who uses Boost.Test preferrred obviously. It might well be more user-friendly re-written by someone who doesn't know as much about it as the author ;-) It would be good for the re-writer to have the Quickbook to html toolchain already working too ;-) The docs can then link directly to the examples, and perhaps include new examples. Or the example could be re-done embedding Quickbook in the included C++ code, as John Maddock has shown so nicely in the Boost.Math documentation. Paul --- Paul A Bristow Prizet Farmhouse, Kendal, Cumbria UK LA8 8AB +44 1539561830 & SMS, Mobile +44 7714 330204 & SMS pbristow@hetp.u-net.com
On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 2:07 AM, Paul A Bristow <pbristow@hetp.u-net.com> wrote
OK - this is a great help - but long-term can we find someone who is willing to rewrite the whole document in Quickbook? GSoC person perhaps? Someone who uses Boost.Test preferrred obviously. It might well be more user-friendly re-written by someone who doesn't know as much about it as the author ;-)
I'd like to volunteer and help out. I'd like to take a stab at writing/rewriting the whole document in Quickbook -- perhaps this can be done in the sandbox? I've been using it enough I think that I should have a good enough grasp of things that are already there. ;-) Having said this, from where do we start? :D
The docs can then link directly to the examples, and perhaps include new examples.
Good idea.
Or the example could be re-done embedding Quickbook in the included C++ code, as John Maddock has shown so nicely in the Boost.Math documentation.
I gotta learn that, and callouts too. :D -- Dean Michael C. Berris Software Engineer, Friendster, Inc.
Dean Michael Berris <mikhailberis <at> gmail.com> writes:
I'd like to volunteer and help out. I'd like to take a stab at writing/rewriting the whole document in Quickbook -- perhaps this can be done in the sandbox? I've been using it enough I think that I should have a good enough grasp of things that are already there.
Having said this, from where do we start? :D
You can look at BoostBook source and xsl scripts I've written to support the docs, once they'll appear in trunk Gennadiy
Paul A Bristow <pbristow <at> hetp.u-net.com> writes:
-----Original Message----- From: boost-bounces <at> lists.boost.org [mailto:boost-bounces <at> lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Gennadiy Rozental Sent: 23 July 2008 18:38 To: boost <at> lists.boost.org Subject: Re: [boost] [test] documentatation on patmedia.net disappeared,not up to date on boost.org
Could you at least check in html documentation only, without
Ilya Sokolov <fal_delivery <at> mail.ru> writes: sources?
I think I'll do just this.
OK - this is a great help - but long-term can we find someone who is willing
to rewrite the whole document in
Quickbook?
1. I don't think it's possible. Even BoostBook is not able to handle what I need. I've got bunch of xsl scripts built on top and I had to make core changes in BoostBook itself (not very big, but significant). 2. We've been through this discussion before. I need to be able to support the documentation. And I am not looking forward learning yet another documentation format or yet another tool that produces my format. All in all I do not see advantages in using quickbook.
The docs can then link directly to the examples, and perhaps include new examples.
Examples support in Boost.Test docs is much more sophisticated. Resulting html includes code, output, source and annotation (not yet fully functional) Gennadiy
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.
In looking through the boost-docs list, and I don't see any unanswered questions from you. BoostBook is working fine for quite a few libraries; what problems are you still running into? - Doug
Douglas Gregor <dgregor <at> osl.iu.edu> writes:
In looking through the boost-docs list, and I don't see any unanswered questions from you. BoostBook is working fine for quite a few libraries; what problems are you still running into?
I'll try to post another one with necessary modification. Who is responsible for the BoostBook officially? Gennadiy
On Jul 23, 2008, at 1:43 PM, Gennadiy Rozental wrote:
Douglas Gregor <dgregor <at> osl.iu.edu> writes:
In looking through the boost-docs list, and I don't see any unanswered questions from you. BoostBook is working fine for quite a few libraries; what problems are you still running into?
I'll try to post another one with necessary modification.
Who is responsible for the BoostBook officially?
Nobody is "officially" responsible for it. I built the first version, but there several people (not including myself) who have been keeping it up-to-date. They're all on the boost-docs mailing list. - Doug
Leo Moisio <leo.moisio <at> gmail.com> writes:
The documentation for Boost.Test on boost.org seems very outdated, but there has been a much more up to date documentation available on
Oh, well. patmedia is no more. I am planning to give docs another shot this weekend. At least they will appear in some other beta location Gennadiy
participants (9)
-
Beman Dawes -
Daryle Walker -
David Abrahams -
Dean Michael Berris -
Douglas Gregor -
Gennadiy Rozental -
Ilya Sokolov -
Leo Moisio -
Paul A Bristow