On Tuesday, December 12, 2017 10:22:24 meppl via Digitalmars-d wrote: > On Tuesday, 12 December 2017 at 06:55:45 UTC, Jonathan M Davis > > wrote: > > On Tuesday, December 05, 2017 20:11:33 Walter Bright via > > > > Digitalmars-d wrote: > >> https://help.github.com/articles/basic-writing-and-formatting-syntax/ > >> > >> Anyone interested in picking up the flag? > >> > >> (I know this has come up before, and I've been opposed to it, > >> but I've > >> changed my mind.) > > > > I confess that looking over that page, I don't see much reason > > to add any of it to ddoc. It all seems like stuff that we can > > already trivially do in ddoc, and most (all?) of it is stuff > > that already has built-in macros. What are we really trying to > > gain here? > > 1) I avoid writing something like $(I foo) into a comment. > Because other people may actually read my source code and not > just read a generated documentation from a source code. So, I > would prefer writing *foo* or _foo_. After all that's the point > of markdown: Pure text _looks_ like intended and enables > html-generation at the same time.
And then you have to worry about something like int* screwing with things, because the compiler decides that you wanted italics. Honestly, I don't think that something like $(I foo) is very onerous - it's not all that different from <i>foo</i> or [i]foo[/i] (which plenty of folks are familiar with), but it's shorter and less visually noisy - and it doesn't risk having stuff that isn't supposed to be markdown being treated as markdown. Personally, I would _very_ much like to see the magic formatting in ddoc kept to a minimum. I don't want to have to guess what the documentation is going to look like or have to constantly generate it to make sure that I didn't screw it up because of some stray character that the compiler decided to treat as special. As it stands, ddoc is fairly clean, and it doesn't have a lot of annoying magic - and the stuff that folks frequently find annoying about it tends to be the magic that it does already have - most notably that it decides to invisibly make some words bold based on what's being documented, forcing you to put _ in front of at least some of those words (and most of us have to actually generate the documentation to catch all of the mistakes that have to do with missing underscores; it would be _much_ nicer if that magic weren't there). IMHO, the less magic formatting that ddoc does the better. I want all of that to be controlled by the macros so that you can look at the source code and clearly see all of the formatting commands without them risking looking like something else. - Jonathan M Davis
