Re: [Boost-docs] Sphinx integration

Subject: Re: [Boost-docs] Sphinx integration
From: Dave Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-10-07 01:54:07

Whoa, re-reading the below, everywhere I wrote "docbook" it should have
been "docutils," a.k.a. ReStructuredText.  Man, I'm sure that was
confusing.

on Tue Sep 27 2011, Dave Abrahams <dave-AT-boostpro.com> wrote:

> The differences run deep.  If it was a totally clear cut win for ReST,
> I'd have pushed for its exclusive adoption years ago.
>
> - quickbook is an extensible programming language; ReST is explicitly
>   trying *not* to be programmable
>
> - quickbook generates boostbook, which can represent rich semantic
>   information.  ReST can't very cleanly express arbitrary semantic or
>   visual markup (bold-italic anyone?)
>
> - quickbook is maintained by Boosters when they have the time, docbook
>   is maintained externally
>
> - quickbook takes a long time to compile, docbook is Python
>
> - quickbook is not really used outside of Boost; docbook is used by
>   manymanymany
>
> - there's no usable Emacs editing mode for quickbook; there is for ReST.

-- 
Dave Abrahams
BoostPro Computing
http://www.boostpro.com