Re: [Boost-docs] [quickbook] Processing names with more than oneunderscore ( _ )

Subject: Re: [Boost-docs] [quickbook] Processing names with more than oneunderscore ( _ )
From: Edward Diener (eldiener_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-02-25 03:34:38

On 2/24/2011 9:46 PM, Joel de Guzman wrote:
> On 2/24/2011 11:33 PM, Paul A. Bristow wrote:
>>> bounces_at_[hidden]] On Behalf Of John Maddock
>>>> I *think* I'd prefer to avoid using the "Preformatted code starts with
>>>> a space or a tab" feature and instead *always* use `` code stuff ...
>>>> ``
>>>> and I *think* I'd like the 'strict syntax ' to enforce that.
>>> Which just goes to show there's no accounting for taste - I love the
>> "indented
>>> text is code" feature, and I've never fallen foul of it (yet!).
>>> I find it easy to read when looking at quickbook source too... but
>>> perhaps
>> I'm
>>> just used to it...
>> Chacun a son gout ;-)
>> Maybe I'm weird, so I'll pipe down.
> Well, I happen to share John's sentiment.

I do too because starting a line with a space or tab does not affect
anything else one does, plus it is totally normal to begin a new line
with text, and not a space or tab, no matter how one writes the
quickbook topics. Unless one
   quite naturally enjoys
  beginning lines with spaces or tabs,
     which I find really weird, then
it seems to me as if the quickbook code indenting feature is fine.

OTOH having names with more than one underscore, which was the original
issue of my OP, is perfectly normal given Boost's rules for the use of
C++ identifiers, and the broken quickbook processing that does NOT
handle names with more than one underscore properly ( the "Simple
formatting" for underline is supposed to kick in only if the name begins
and ends in an underscore, but actually kicks in whenever there are two
or more underscores in any name no matter where they are in the
identifier ) makes things even worse. So why can't we either correct the
"Simple formatting" bug or, if that is currently too difficult to do
because of parsing issues, allow an option that will eliminate "Simple
formatting" completely since it is totally redundant anyway and the
alternative to "Simple formatting" is totally in the spirit of quickbook

I am very appreciative of the work Joel de Guzman, Eric Niebler, and
Daniel James have done with quickbook, so please do not interpret my OP
and this remark as a knock on any programmer. Thank goodness we have
quickbook and don't have to deal directly with docbook itself.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : 2017-11-11 08:50:41 UTC