Hello all, I've improved the DocBook-based reference documentation a bit more. Changes & new features: - Ability to use the Docbookesque <classname>foo</classname> to create a link to the class named "foo" (as defined in a reference section) within text, function signatures, etc. - Better support for syntax highlighting - Better support for man pages
The current HTMLized version of the Boost.Function docs (incomplete, but getting closer...) is here: http://www.cs.rpi.edu/~gregod/Boost/function-html/ The man pages (very much improved!) are available here: http://www.cs.rpi.edu/~gregod/Boost/function-man/ Is this the way we want to go with documentation? Should we explore other options (e.g., LaTeX) further, or is there any other part of the system we need to see working before we can choose? We need a better documentation solution for Boost, but if developers think we are going the wrong way and won't use it (and don't speak up), then the situation is dire indeed. Doug _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
