From: Sohail Somani (s.somani_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-07-24 17:35:02
> -----Original Message-----
> From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden]
> [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Bennett, Patrick
> Sent: Monday, July 24, 2006 2:29 PM
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Subject: Re: [boost] Ace??? (was: ANN: POCO - C++ Portable Components)
> > -----Original Message-----
> > [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Steven Burns
> > Sent: Monday, July 24, 2006 5:18 PM
> > To: boost_at_[hidden]
> > Subject: Re: [boost] Ace??? (was: ANN: POCO - C++ Portable
> > POCO's documentation is fine, sometimes a method could
> > deserve more explanation but it's still fine given the fact
> > most of the classes are very intuitive.
> > Boost documentation is usually excellent, which is mandatory
> > because some classes are not intuitive at first sight.
> > ACE's website is simply unfriendly and looks careless.
> Poco's documentation is 'ok', but the fact that the comments for all
> methods are *below* the method declarations is a style disaster.
Boost docs > *
But seriously, I think more libraries documented like boost would be
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk