Walter Bright wrote: > bearophile wrote: >> Removing that HTML ddoc parsing & HTML generation from DMD allows such code >> to evolve faster and to be debugged more efficiently. Today some people are >> using > > There are very good reasons why ddoc is part of dmd. > > 1. Being a defined part of D means it's ALWAYS there. That means there won't > be D compilers without ddoc. That means that people can rely on it being > there, and use it with confidence. ...
I agree, though the standard output is not so pleasant. When the new website design is adopted, would you please consider shipping a .ddoc plus the css needed in a similar style for user documentation? No doubt people are willing to help with this, I certainly would.
