On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 01:00:19PM -0800, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d wrote: > On 12/16/2015 12:21 AM, ZombineDev wrote: > >Well DDoc may have it's disadvantages, but I'm certain that the > >documentation would have been far worse if it wasn't for it. > > No need to speculate :-) Before Ddoc, the Phobos documentation was > horrific, probably the worst I'd ever seen. It was so bad it was > unusual for there to be any correct documentation for a particular > function, or even anything at all. > > Ddoc utterly transformed that, almost overnight. It's hard to > underestimate the positive impact Ddoc has had on D documentation.
I don't think anybody is questioning the value of ddoc as a *documentation generator*. The issue here is whether it has the same value as a *website programming language*. Very different things. T -- "640K ought to be enough" -- Bill G. (allegedly), 1984. "The Internet is not a primary goal for PC usage" -- Bill G., 1995. "Linux has no impact on Microsoft's strategy" -- Bill G., 1999.
