Subject: Re: [boost] [test] boost.test owner unresponsive to persistent problems for multiple years
From: Paul A. Bristow (pbristow_at_[hidden])
Date: 2015-01-06 05:27:00
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Boost [mailto:boost-bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of Raffi
> Sent: 06 January 2015 01:53
> To: boost_at_[hidden]
> Subject: Re: [boost] [test] boost.test owner unresponsive to persistent
> multiple years
> You have a point. Our current concern is that the documentation is huge and it
> hard to find a good way of presenting all the features in boost.test.
> Parts such as execution monitor are very advanced, and have enough content to
> have their own section. This thing is that, from a user perspective, it is
> understand what such parts have to do with boost.test. So we think it is
> have a separate document for these parts.
> One option is to have these parts documented in doxygen only, with \sections
> everything doxygen is able to provide. The other option is to have several
> documents (users guide, users reference, advanced topics, full reference), but
> not know if it would address the issue.
I'm not understanding why you can't use a separate Quickbook section called
and provide the execution monitor stuff there.
What is it that is so different about this that the Quickbook structure etc
The document size is irrelevant - what counts is finding what you want to know.
The TOC is the first weapon, and the (auto-)index second, and the C++ reference
> > My only immediate criticism is that I think placing the Output in a
> > second box to the right of the Code makes assumptions about page width
> > that are probably unjustified, especially on tablets and phones (which
> > are often used as a second screen to display manuals etc).
> > The output box is certain to overflow many screens and will definitely
> mess up a
> > PDF version making it useless. I can see that it makes sure that the
> > output is close to the source, but vertical space is unlimited,
> > whereas width is precious.
>> > I have yet to understand if/how you are using Quickbook code...
> We use a template, and those changes are straightforward. I was wondering if,
> quickbook, it would be possible to have:
> - either an output that is "folded" by default and "unfolded" dynamically when
> user clicks it
> - or an output created on another page, without creating a section under the
> - and finally if all these can be easily disabled for the PDF output
> Finally, for the arrangement of the table columns, would some "fluid
> provided by bootstrap address this issue?
There are some conditional tools in Quickbook - see the manual
Like C++ #ifdef, you can generate phrases depending on the presence of a macro.
that may make this possible? With some work and yet more complexity :-(
But IMO having the output to the right just isn't helpful anyway. I really
don't see the benefit (and lots of non-benefits ;-).
However, you two obviously like it - so why not put the built html somewhere and
let the users comment on whether they like it?
Ship the whole built /doc and subfolder like/html and /doxygen section to your
Dropbox or somewhere and provide a link to it?
> We use code snippet almost everywhere. The example you mention has also its
> and has been checked, although not in an automated manner.
> We reproduced the code in this very example because we wanted the macros
> All snippets have the same markup "example_code" (looks like a trick to
> quickbook) and allows us to use the same template for all snippets/examples.
> This is also the case for the outputs.
Ah - I see why you have done this now. (Not sure I would have done but ...)
> Ok. What I see is that the \internal pieces appear in the final XML, without
> mention of the internal itself.
\code ... \endcond works for me.
> I also noticed that the operator overload is not properly rendered.
Others have noted difficulties with this - and recently. Not sure if and how it
can be fixed.
> > Some of the bug reports suggest that <at> as a trip character may
> produce different
> > (wrong?) results compared to backslash \ as trip. This may be 'cured' now.
> > I've built with the hot-off-the-press bug-fix release 22.214.171.124.
> One last question: I just noticed the existence of the develop doc website
> How often is it updated?
Daniel James is your man to ask.
--- Paul A. Bristow Prizet Farmhouse Kendal UK LA8 8AB +44 (0) 1539 561830
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk