Subject: Re: [boost] [doxygen] CSS/Temple files for Doxygen
From: Paul A. Bristow (pbristow_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-07-10 06:18:03
> -----Original Message-----
> From: boost-bounces_at_[hidden] [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Artyom
> Sent: Saturday, July 09, 2011 8:50 PM
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Subject: Re: [boost] [doxygen] CSS/Temple files for Doxygen
> ----- Original Message ----
> > From: Paul A. Bristow <pbristow_at_[hidden]>
> To be honest...
> I prefer to use ONE too for projects I work on.
> With Doxygen I can generate both great tutorials and reference (in-source-code) documentation,
> integrate them and what is most important to use ONE - SAME syntax.
> The only project using quickbook today is Boost. And it can't be really used outside the scope of
> I don't develop for Boost only but rather have several different FOSS projects that use Doxygen
> of them use Boost.Build.
> So instead of learning one more tool, create an entire toolchain of Doxyen/Quickbook/DocBook/HTML
> prefer to use one tool that can be easily integrated with CMake and easy to install.
> To be honest. I find Doxygen a very good tool for documenting software and I don't understand why
> hadn't adopted one... But this is other story.
> Finally I don't want to move to other tool especially when Boost does not enforce me. I'll keep
> as-is and maybe tweak CSS a little
OK, I can see I'm not going to persuade you :-)
But your Doxygen docs looks nice and are up to Boost standards.
(Have you thought of adding custom Doxygen html header/footers to make it look Boostier?)
> BTW Doxygen knows to produce PDFs as well.
"PDF can be generated from the LaTeX output"
Have you done this for your docs? Boost PDF versions are popular.