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

on Tue Sep 27 2011, Dave Abrahams <> 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

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