Re: [boost] Documentation Edits

Subject: Re: [boost] Documentation Edits
From: joel (joel.falcou_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-06-12 10:23:29

Zachary Turner wrote:
> What is the standard protocol for editing documentation?  It doesn't appear
> to be a wiki, unless you have to explicitly request write access in which I
> wasn't aware of that.  The reason I ask is that there are many times where
> I've spent forever toiling over the documentation of some new library that I
> wasn't familiar with, because the documentation either provided no /
> insufficient samples, functions with very general names and one-liner
> documentation that says (for example) "runs the service".  Which is pretty
> obvious when the function is called run, but no mention of the implications
> or what "running" even means.  Other examples include lack of discussion
> over memory ownership (I spent 6 hours yesterday trying to trace down a
> memory corruption only to later find that in one of the many example
> programs for the library a single line comment that said "this causes X to
> take ownership of Y".  If that had been in the documentation I would have
> spent 5 minutes tracing down the bug.
>   
This idea sound slike a great one. I think a more liberal take should be 
done on such editing

-- 
___________________________________________
Joel Falcou - Assistant Professor
PARALL Team - LRI - Universite Paris Sud XI
Tel : [phone]