troy d. straszheim wrote:
On Sun, Nov 06, 2005 at 11:14:18PM +0800, Joel de Guzman wrote:
I emphasized "might" because I am not quite sure. Like
you, I too use lots of macros. Now, I place them at the
top. Yes, you can generate an index from them, even make
it automatic (special defs?). I find it cumbersome that
I can't just include the macros once and have it applied
globally.
Special defs? Apologies, I'm new to the docs list. Currently I can
just talk all of those [def X [link X /X/]] macros, extract and
alphabetize the X's, put them in a section called "index", and I have
a kind of glossary/index (glindex?), a list of links to each X's
"primary" docs location. But only in html, not in fo-generated pdf.
I'm curious as to how you like to generate your indexes.
I was just rambling. I was imagining a special version of
the def especially for index generation. If we were to use
something like [idef X [link X /X/]], we can make the process
that you have just outlined above automatically done by Qb.
Another possible behavior would be to get rid of macro
scoping at the include level and move them over to the
section level as I hinted in my previous email. I'm not
yet sure but this seems to be a more practical approach.
Either that or we can also have explicit control of macro
scopes. I'm leaning towards the former.
Ah, I'd missed that. Personally I think that's the way to go. With
unscoped includes and scoped macros, the behaviour is generally more
consistent with C++. One could even adopt a convention of .qbk for
quickbook files and .qbh for quickbook "headers" of macros. One could
concievably even enforce a one-definition rule for macros (though I
don't have a good feel for how much trouble that would save people in
the long run).
C++ does not have scoped macros, but I think I know what
you mean. ODR for Qb? Oof. Too much I suppose :-)
(Oh and BTW, we'll have parametric macros soon so macro
names like *something might not work anymore. Again it's
a big might. At most, we can allow any character except
the parentheses '(', ')', comma ',' and spaces. So the
smiley :-) macro in the original QB docs will have to
go :-) ).
Awesome. "for" loops, too? (wink)
How about a version of Boost Preprocessor Library for Qb?
(joke) Nah, I think that's too much. Let's keep it simple.
A generalized container + for_each might be interesting.
Anyhow *this *particular *syntax is irrelevant, !anything _would
^work.
Right. It's easy to grep.
Cheers,
--
Joel de Guzman
http://www.boost-consulting.com
http://spirit.sf.net
-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by:
Tame your development challenges with Apache's Geronimo App Server. Download
it for free - -and be entered to win a 42" plasma tv or your very own
Sony(tm)PSP. Click here to play: http://sourceforge.net/geronimo.php
_______________________________________________
Boost-docs mailing list
[email protected]
Unsubscribe and other administrative requests:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/boost-docs
