From: Joel de Guzman (joel_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-06-20 18:15:28
Douglas Gregor wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-06-20 at 13:13 -0300, Matias Capeletto wrote:
>> * 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 boost.build before I do any
>> commit. You can not understand the value of this feature til you use
> BoostBook actually has some support for literate programming, which is
It has? Darn! I didn't know that. Where can I know more about it?
What we have now is reverse-lit. Dave has been advocating for a
full-Lit which I havent' done yet (me slap in head!).
> the opposite of the approach you're describing. Basically, you can name
> the code samples you write in BoostBook, then later on have it produce
> real example files by weaving together snippets of code with other
> support code. The Function library used this at one point to create its
> test suite (see libs/function/doc/tests.xml and
> libs/function/doc/tutorial.xml). But, without good integration into the
> build system, this feature never really got used.
> Granted, I'm not recommending that you use this part of BoostBook...
Why? I can imagine exposing this part of the interface to quickbook
-- Joel de Guzman http://www.boost-consulting.com http://spirit.sf.net
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk