Re: [Boost-users] Boost.Test Documentation

From: Gennadiy Rozental (rogeeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-08-17 00:31:50

"Uwe Schuster" <Uwe.Schuster_at_[hidden]> wrote in message 
news:BFC1D03DDCEEE34D94D6DBCAF0C46A394CA0F6_at_KEMPMAIL.woodward.com...
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: boost-users-bounces_at_[hidden]
>> [mailto:boost-users-bounces_at_[hidden]]On Behalf Of Gennadiy
>> Rozental
>> Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2007 5:39 AM
>> To: boost-users_at_[hidden]
>> Subject: Re: [Boost-users] Boost.Test Documentation
>>
>
>> "Yann Golanski" <yann_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
>> news:20070814084453.GB60576_at_kierun.org...
>> > For example:
>> >
>> http://www.patmedia.net/~rogeeff/html/utf/user-guide/runtime-config/reference.html
>> > In "report_level", the levels are indicated as no, confirm,
>> short and
>> > detaled -- the latter should be details.
>>
>> Actually it's "detailed". Fixed anyway
>
> On this page (report_level) the "Command line argument name" seems to be 
> wrong.
> Also on the "detect_memory_leak" page.

Fixed.

> Why the list of parameters on the "Runtime parameters reference page" 
> consists of the command line argument names? Shouldn't it be the full 
> names instead?

These are their names. CLA just happend to coinside with them.