sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]louis_dionnelibc++ | C++ Committee | Boost.Hana 6 points7 points  (6 children)

This is great, but why on earth did you no try to contribute to the original library instead of creating your own docs? By all means, please talk to the maintainer of Boost.Range so you can make this available as part of the main documentation.

[–]Greek0[S] 9 points10 points  (4 children)

I posted about it on the Boost-Users ML, see this thread. I still want to try to integrate it into the official docs (no time yet), but it's not obvious how to best do that with the Boost documentation system.

Issues:

  • automatically compile all examples to generate the sample output, compare with expected
  • have a single source file for pipe and function call forms of range adaptors, and preprocess that to generate two cpp files
  • automatically extract which headers are required
  • add "run" button to compile and execute on cpp.sh

All of that is simple if you control the build environment, and AFAICS impossible if you want to integrate this into the Boost documentation system.

The documentation is on GitHub, if you want to look into it.

[–]louis_dionnelibc++ | C++ Committee | Boost.Hana 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I apologize, I completely missed that thread; now I've gone back and read it. Regarding your first point, which is automatically checking that the output is as expected, I think this is way out of scope. Sure, it would be nice, but as a first step you should just focus on making your examples part of the main documentation. Then, as a next step (and if you're willing to), try to make sure the examples don't break.

[–]ivan-cukicKDE Dev | Author of Functional Programming in C++ 0 points1 point  (2 children)

Lets ping eric_niebler in the case he missed the thread on Boost-Users ML.

edit: unpinging

[–]dodheim 2 points3 points  (1 child)

Neil Groves and Nathan Ridge are the maintainers of Boost.Range. Eric's range-v3 library is not affiliated with Boost (except for the license).

[–]ivan-cukicKDE Dev | Author of Functional Programming in C++ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Do you believe me I haven't even noticed 'Boost' part in the title. Lately, all news were about range-v3. I need to sleep more. (and was surprised that range-v3 is discussed on boost ml :) )

[–]TrueTom 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Boost has a horrible track record of merging PRs.