Subject: Re: [boost] [geometry] Documentation prototype for review
From: Paul A. Bristow (pbristow_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-02-22 10:50:55
> -----Original Message-----
> From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden] [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On
> Mateusz Loskot
> Sent: Saturday, February 20, 2010 2:53 PM
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Subject: Re: [boost] [geometry] Documentation prototype for review
> > Several libraries use both, see Boost.Units, Accumulator, (and of
> > course the NotAlibrary SVGPlot Soc 2007/vizisualization)
> I have checked Acccumulator docs and I have to admit its reference is
> nothing more to me than a headers/code browser.
> It includes very little information.
> The Units does it better and I've just learned that pages like this
> is generated from Doxygen comments...hmmm
Sadly the work of devising the units library was so great that the authors
strength to go through and Doxygen comments all the code - a massive, boring but
but one that might still be an 'exercise for the student' - perhaps a GSoC
> > and I think this is much the best way to go, especially as you have
> > already done the tedious task of adding Doxygen style comments to the
> > code, so that you (and readers) would lose much if you don't provide
> > it.
> Yes, now I can see the point and that it's possible to combine both,
> Quickbook and Doxygen. Sounds as the best option indeed.
You can get more of the flavour of what can be achieved by glancing at the SVG
Here all (I hope) of the functions etc are Doxygen commented.
Doxygenating the C++ code was a *lot* of work, but the end result is very user
and you can be much more confident that it follows source code changes.
You've already done most of the hard work...
--- Paul A. Bristow Prizet Farmhouse Kendal, UK LA8 8AB +44 1539 561830, mobile +44 7714330204 pbristow_at_[hidden]
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk