From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-09-21 15:26:24
At 08:58 AM 9/21/2003, David Abrahams wrote:
>Beman Dawes <bdawes_at_[hidden]> writes:
>> How about this form (using a filesystem library example):
>> // boost/filesystem/path.hpp
>> // Copyright Beman Dawes 2002. Use, modification and distribution is
>> // subject to the Boost Software License Version 1.0. (See
>> // file LICENSE-1.0 or http://www.boost.org/LICENSE-1.0)
>> // See http://www.boost.org/libs/filesystem for documentation.
>> Is that OK?
>I like it. I still want to drop "the".
Isn't it better usage to include "the"? Anybody with a degree in English
lurking here? Unless someone comes forward with a strong argument, I think
we should leave the "the" in.
>> What should the wording associated with the library URL be? "See ...
>> for documentation." doesn't seem quite right. The docs at that URL may
>> be for a later version. The point is to direct people to the library's
>> home page, particularly if they are looking at a file which has become
>> separated from its documentation or is out-of-date.
>> // See http://www.boost.org/libs/filesystem for library home page.
>> Would that be better?
>What I've normally seen is something like
>// See http://www.boost.org/libs/filesystem for this library's current
>// version and documentation
I guess there are several formulations that would work.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk