Subject: Re: [Boost-docs] A downside of qbk
From: Dave Abrahams (dave_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-11-06 21:21:04
on Sun Nov 06 2011, Dave Abrahams <dave-AT-boostpro.com> wrote:
> I've been meaning to point out the difference between
> As long as qbk is a full-fledged programming language, we may never be
> able to expect better. Any ideas? Does anyone think we can possibly
> convince GitHub to include a qbk processor?
Actually, I just had an idea: make sure that qbk is an extension of
markdown syntax, which IMO is winning the wiki-like syntax wars. Then
we could get reasonable rendering for many things even where there's no
qbk support at all.
-- Dave Abrahams BoostPro Computing http://www.boostpro.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : 2017-11-11 08:50:41 UTC