Re: Sphinx integration

Dave Abrahams <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.lib.boost.documentation
Message-ID <[email protected]>
on Sun Oct 02 2011, Edward Diener <eldiener-AT-tropicsoft.com> wrote:

> On 10/2/2011 6:03 PM, Dave Abrahams wrote:
>>
>
>> on Thu Sep 29 2011, Mateusz Loskot<mateusz-AT-loskot.net>  wrote:
>>
>>> On 28/09/11 17:09, John Maddock wrote:
>>>>>> Perhaps quickbook to reStructuredText is a feasible solution.
>>>
>>>>>> Then all move to writing in reStructuredText, etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> But then there's the issue of lossiness.
>>>>
>>>> And lets not forget that some of us really like quickbook ;-)
>>>
>>> I do like quickbook too.
>>> Although may intention was to discuss the workflow of documenting Boost,
>>> I think I have identified what is the biggest pain to me: Doxygen
>>> integration in BoostBook.
>>>
>>> Doxygen is widely used C++ code documenting tool.
>>> Fortunately or unfortunately, it is also used by many Boost authors.
>>>
>>> Doxygen does not support many of the terms/concepts/elements used across
>>> Boost libraries. It is also becasue it is almost impossible to document
>>> them well at source code levels.
>>> However, things like "concept and model" exist at source code level,
>>    do not?---------------------------------^
>
> Doxygen generally deals with C++ constructs, and there is no C++
> construct called "concept" or "model". 

Yes I know.  I was suggesting that Mateusz left out a couple of words
above.  Otherwise it seems not to gibe with reality.

> If concepts had been voted into C++0x, then no doubt doxygen would
> have considered documenting it as a C++ construct.
>
> Conversely there is no limit in doxygen to documenting whatever you
> want as free-from doxygen documentation and so you could document
> concepts' in doxygen if you wanted to do so in whatever format you
> like. There are a number of techniques for this but probably the
> easiest is to just add such documentation to a @file documentation,
> and it will show up in the final output.

But what's the advantage in that over, say, just using quickbook,
boostbook, or any of the other non-automatic tools for that part of the
documentation?

-- 
Dave Abrahams
BoostPro Computing
http://www.boostpro.com
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.