Re: [boost] Re: Reference documentation: one approach

From: David Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-11-01 21:51:50

"Jeff Garland" <jeff_at_[hidden]> writes:

> 
> For my purposes, Doxygen will work fine so I'm not planning on 
> giving it up now.  (And I have plenty of template code -- not 
> meta code, just regular templates see:
> http://www.crystalclearsoftware.com/libraries/gdtl/gdtl_ref_guide/classboost_1_1date__time_1_1date.html for example)

I've got to admit, it appears to have a reasonable grasp of what's
happening in your code. I'm not fond of the way things are presented,
but then I've got a lot of complaints with Synopsis in that area as
well.

> And please, if you find bugs with the template handling in a recent 
> release of Doxygen be sure to report them.  The developer of Doxygen 
> is very responsive and helpful in fixing issues. There are regular
> weekly releases for bug fixes and enhancements.  And, I'm certainly 
> willing to try Synopsis.  

It would be interesting to throw Doxygen at Boost.Python and Synopsis
at Boost.DateTime for comparison.

> Let me know when I can download an RPM for Linux and an exe
> installer for windows.

Hey! No fair playing the installation card! ;-)
-- 
                    David Abrahams
dave_at_[hidden] * http://www.boost-consulting.com