Boost logo

Boost :

From: Matias Capeletto (matias.capeletto_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-06-20 12:13:14

On 6/20/07, Vladimir Prus <ghost_at_[hidden]> wrote:

Hi Vladimir,

> Douglas Gregor wrote:
> > I would strongly advise that everything go into Quickbook format. It's
> > far easier to write documentation in Quickbook than Boostbook, and
> > Quickbook gives us more options.
> What options? Since you've authored Boostbook you must know better,
> but I still don't see the value in using home-grown documentation format.

Have you tried Quickbook?
It is an impressive tool. (I really think that it can be use for
others things in the future beside boost). It is a lot easier to
maintain, to read, to write, to share.

Some of the options that are included in Quickbook and not in Boostbook are:

* Support for code import. I will be very unhappy with out this
feature. In the review of Boost.Bimap we find a lot of typos in docs
examples. Every bit of code that appears in y docs now are in
libs/bimap/example, and are tested with before I do any
commit. You can not understand the value of this feature til you use

* Support for macros and templates.

* Simple markup for italics, bold, preformatted, blurbs, code samples,
tables, URLs, anchors, images, etc.

And there is a lot more...

Best regards

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at