João Abecasis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > David Abrahams wrote: >> As for Effects and Returns clauses, I think >> http://www.boost.org/libs/iterator/doc/iterator_facade.html#iterator-facade-operations >> came out pretty nicely. > > I actually find this list somewhat unreadable. For one, what grabs my > attention first are the "Effects" or "Returns" clauses and it is not > immediately obvious what they relate to, if the signature preceding or > the one after.
I agree. I was talking about the clauses in isolation, not w.r.t. the signatures above them. > Going down a bit in the same page, the signatures for function templates > signatures are more indented than the "Effects/Returns" clauses which > also doesn't help. True, but that's what they do in the standard (great excuse, eh?) > I think the function declarations should be given some more emphasis and > their readability could be improved. > > Unfortunately, I am not sure how this would be better accomplished. > Perhaps some more line breaks and indentation, together with syntax > highlighting would aid on the readability side. Whitespace, larger > fontsizes or different background colors, for example, could help on the > emphasis side. <HR> might help, I think :) -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Boost-docs mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe and other administrative requests: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/boost-docs
