Subject: Re: [boost] Two minor (?) legal-related questions (empty linesand"Boost sponsorship")
From: Paul A. Bristow (pbristow_at_[hidden])
Date: 2009-01-28 11:35:50
> -----Original Message-----
> From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden] [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]]
> Behalf Of Niels Dekker - mail address until 2010-10-10
> Sent: 28 January 2009 15:13
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Subject: Re: [boost] Two minor (?) legal-related questions (empty
> Gennaro Prota wrote:
> > the "how to apply to source files" entry at
> > <http://www.boost.org/users/license.html>
> > asks to leave an empty line before and after the comment block
> > which contains copyright notice and license reference. I'm
> > wondering if that was an advice from the lawyers who wrote the
> > license or just a stylistic preference.
> Beman Dawes wrote:
> > Stylistic.
> Thomas Klimpel wrote:
> > So the inspection report tool will not be affected by missing empty
> > lines?
> And would it be okay to have the comment block located /after/ the
> include guard macro? For my personal header files I prefer to have the
> include-guard defined at the very first line. Which makes life easier
> when I need to dive into the preprocessor output...
Well - what about Doxygen comments like
\brief Create 2D plots in Scalable Vector Graphic (SVG) format.
\author Jacob Voytko & Paul A. Bristow
// Copyright Jacob Voytko 2007
// Copyright Paul A. Bristow 2007, 2008, 2009
// Use, modification and distribution are subject to the
// Boost Software License, Version 1.0.
// (See accompanying file LICENSE_1_0.txt
// or copy at http://www.boost.org/LICENSE_1_0.txt)
This *feels* as though it should come first?
But I think that a consistent recommended style is the key thing.
--- Paul A. Bristow Prizet Farmhouse Kendal, UK LA8 8AB +44 1539 561830, mobile +44 7714330204 pbristow_at_[hidden]
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk