[C++-sig] Re: tutorial html files out of date?
dave at boost-consulting.com
Thu Nov 6 01:57:55 CET 2003
"Ralf W. Grosse-Kunstleve" <rwgk at yahoo.com> writes:
> --- Joel de Guzman <joel at boost-consulting.com> wrote:
>> > Joel has the correctly configured quickdoc to generate the tutorial
>> > documentation... if Joel can't do it, I guess I can configure mine to
>> > handle the tutorial too (I think only the copyright needs to be changed).
>> Thanks, I'd appreciate that a lot. Perhaps it's more Python savvy to
>> switch to ReST? I'm not sure.
All due respect to quickdoc, ReST rocks.
> I am worried that 1.31 is released (or even just branched) before the tutorial
> is updated. Could we please first do something now-ish and be more ambitious
> only after 1.31 is out?
1. There's going to be some substantial time before 1.31 is branched;
we have plenty of iterator library issues to sort out before then.
2. Beman's rule is: major doc changes after branching are OK; major
code changes aren't. There's no problem moving the tutorial update
to the branch.
That said, I agree we should update the tutorial first and change
More information about the Cplusplus-sig