From: Janek Kozicki (janek_listy_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-12-12 05:47:26
David Abrahams said: (by the date of Mon, 11 Dec 2006 18:23:31 -0500)
> Roland Schwarz <roland.schwarz_at_[hidden]> writes:
> > Roland Schwarz wrote:
> >> David Abrahams wrote:
> >>> I really need feedback on what I've done,
> >> First to say: I would like to have seen something of similar quality on
> >> my first encounter to boost!
> >> Section 4)
> >> Why is only Boost.Python hyperlinked?
> > Oops, this might sound unintentional rude.
> It didn't; it's a legit question. Should I link everything or nothing
> or is inconsistency just fine?
Because the context is "Boost libraries that can't be used without
separate compilation", we have two cases:
- if the linked docs will explain how to perform a separate
compilation of the library, then link all of them.
- if they do not explain how to perform a separate compilation then
do not link.
I'd prefer that each of them linked to an anchor (or part of
documentation) of respective ilbrary which explains how to perform
compilation of that library.
Then someone will read the "getting started" and will say - oh, I
need only filesystem and I don't want to wait till everything
compiles. I will separately compile just this one, and he clicks the
-- Janek Kozicki |
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk