From: Nava Whiteford (nwhiteford_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-03-08 13:15:18
> >I'm reading though the boost unit testing documentation at:
> >It's good, but I think could probably do with some basic copy
> >editing. As I'm reading though it anyway I'd be happy to do it, is this ok? What
> >procedure should I follow to do this?
> I've alrady tried to do this, but failed because it is generated using
> Dreamweaver. Unless you have this software, and devise a
> CVS/SVN method of working togther with others, especially Gennadiy, it's
> difficult to work jointly. (This is why using Boost.Book
> aka Quickbook/Docbook is a more promising methodology)
Well, I've been asked to teach a short course on unit testing in C++.
I might consider converting this in to DocBook format if it becomes
useful for me.
Btw, how widely is the Boost Unit testing library used? It seems that many
libraries in Boost opt not to use it?
> IMO, it is also the *structure* of the documentation that is causing most
I'd be interested in hearing your views. As an aside could the class
documentation not be generated directly from the source using something
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk