João Abecasis wrote:
> Joel de Guzman wrote:
>> João Abecasis wrote:
>>> Joel de Guzman wrote:
>>> I really like this direction! In fact I have given some thought to the 
>>> current quickbook grammar and the conclusion I came to is that it is 
>>> highly redundant. We could probably get away with just couple of general 
>>> rules and lots of templates (in code or otherwise).
>> We are in agreement. Feel free to devise a plan.
> 
> In its essence quickbook is a text transformation tool. Perhaps putting 
> aside (just for a while) the doc-generating side of it would take us 
> further.
> 
> The only plan I have at the moment is to look at the grammar and distil 
> the essence of quickbook out of it...

Take your time. At the very least, we can start with a quickbook
basic template library with all those markups that we can
transform into templates. We can then incrementally add into it
as needed (e.g. John's proposed additions).

>>>> Examples:
>>>>
>>>>      [footnote A sample footnote]
>>>>      [blurb a blurb]
>>>>      [note This is a note]
>>>>      [tip This is a tip]
>>>>      [important This is important]
>>>>      [caution This is a caution]
>>>>      [warning This is a warning]
>>> One question though... How do you decide where an argument ends and 
>>> another begins? Brackets instead of commas?
>> I see no problem with commas delimiting arguments. If you have
>> embedded commas in your arguments, escape them. Example:
>>
>>      [note Hello/, World]
>>
>> What am I missing?
> 
> If one is to write a paragraph of text as an argument to a template 
> (e.g., warning, above), escaping every comma could be ineffective. How 
> about:
> 
>      1 argument:
>          [warning Some text to go with it, with commas!]
> 
>      2 or more arguments
>          [pow [x][y]]
>      or, (stealing from the fusion docs ;-) )
>          [parameter
>              [seq]
>              [A model of Forward Sequence, e == t  must be a valid
>              expression, convertible to bool, for each element e  in seq]
>              [The sequence to search]
>          ]

Good point. I think I agree. If one objective is to make templates
look and act like plain quickbook markups, then I think that's
the way to go.

(BTW, we'll surely need variadic templates and ways to access the
arguments in template bodies.)

Regards,
-- 
Joel de Guzman
http://www.boost-consulting.com
http://spirit.sf.net



_______________________________________________
Boost-docs mailing list
[email protected]
Unsubscribe and other administrative requests: 
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/boost-docs

Reply via email to