Boost logo

Boost :

Subject: Re: [boost] ATTENTION: Library requirements..
From: Agustín K-ballo Bergé (kaballo86_at_[hidden])
Date: 2016-01-10 22:35:57

On 1/11/2016 12:23 AM, Agustín K-ballo Bergé wrote:
> On 1/10/2016 11:56 PM, Rene Rivera wrote:
>> On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 5:05 PM, Agustín K-ballo Bergé <
>> kaballo86_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>> On 1/10/2016 7:51 PM, Louis Dionne wrote:
>>>> Robert Ramey <ramey <at>> writes:
>>>>> The extra space used seems a small price to pay for this benefit.
>>>> It's not just about extra space. Source control is for _source_
>>>> files, not
>>>> generated stuff. I don't want generated files to appear in the commit
>>>> history
>>>> of a code branch (but another branch like gh-pages is fine).
>>> By way of example, this is the kind of noise committing generated
>>> documentation can yield:
>> And by comparison, here's the minimal non-noise that pre-generating for
>> Predef has: <
>>> .
> I honestly don't get this... No source code appears to change, but the
> documentation somehow needs to be regenerated? Or does moving a .jam
> file to a different directory cause macros to become uppercase? Or is
> this commit a bunch of orthogonal changes bundled together?
> Unless your documentation source is the HTML itself, committing
> documentation output will necessarily introduce noise as it modifies
> both the source and the target. But then we would be talking static
> documentation, not generated documentation.

After digging a bit more I found that some of the changes relate to this
dating from Dec 8, 2015

It's possible that the remaining documentation changes are too due to
out-of-sync documentation.


Agustín K-ballo Bergé.-

Boost list run by bdawes at, gregod at, cpdaniel at, john at