Re: [Boost-users] Boost::Test Samples?

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] Boost::Test Samples?
From: Gennadiy Rozental (rogeeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2011-08-09 01:18:42

Richard <legalize+jeeves <at> mail.xmission.com> writes:

> 
> [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup]
> 
> Gennadiy Rozental <rogeeff <at> gmail.com> spake the secret code
> <loom.20110807T082725-442 <at> post.gmane.org> thusly:
> 
> >> The Boost::Test library lacks clear and concise documentation (the
> >> online documentation is fractured, lack clarity, is hard to follow,
> >> and has broken links). 
> >
> >I'm sorry you do not like the way documentation is structured. What would you
> >prefer it to look like? which particular parts you find unclear?
> 
> My complaint with the documentation is that when read linearly the
> semantic level of the information jumps up and down the complexity
> ladder repeatedly.

Indeed it's structured more by function than complexity, though some complexity
order is present. For example it first covers simplest type of test cases going
on to cover more advanced cases.

> By this, I mean that tiny implementation details
> are presented before the overall picture has been established.  For a

Can you give some examples?

> new user, this is troublesome because I get lost in expert details
> before I've even seen a complete novice overview of the framework.
> 
> This is why I wrote that series of tutorials on how to write tests
> using Boost.Test.  I'd be happy to work with you to turn this into
> a contribution to the documentation as a "getting started" or "user's
> guide" to boost.test.

As a first step plan to add a link to your tutorials somewhere in Boost.Test
"getting started" section, but we can discuss actually incorporating it into
Boost.Test docs.

Regards,
Gennadiy