Subject: Re: [boost] [random] new documentation
From: Joachim Faulhaber (afojgo_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-02-22 12:57:01
2010/2/22 Mateusz Loskot <mateusz_at_[hidden]>:
> Joachim Faulhaber wrote:
>> Hi Mateusz,
>> 2010/2/22 Mateusz Loskot <mateusz_at_[hidden]>
>>> Joachim Faulhaber wrote:
>>>> 2010/2/22 Steven Watanabe <watanabesj_at_[hidden]>
>>>>> I have the same problem in my reference section. E.g.
>>>> If someone knew a trick for a better formatting result, I'd be very
>>> Indenting source code itself usually helps:
>> In this case unfortunately no. My source code had some line breaks
>> already and I further broke it down and indented according to your
>> suggestion. But the formatting result was the same as before.
> I did a quick test calling Doxygen directly and it preserves
> formatting but it is for source code listings, which may behave
> differently to synopsis generated from XML output. Indeed.
No problem, thanks for your suggestion anyway.
To be honest, I have no idea how the integration of
quickbook and doxygen works but I like the uniform
typographical style of the quickbook docs very much
and the generated references are IMO nicer than those
generated by doxygen alone. Most of the time the
generated docs are looking good. Those few exceptions
are a challenge for the future.
With thanks to the quickbook authors and maintainers
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk