On Sunday, 30 September 2012 at 13:48:41 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Sunday, 30 September 2012 at 11:01:50 UTC, Jacob Carlborg
wrote:
Is it just me that thinks that having a tool that fixes the
generated documentation is ridiculous. The compiler should be
modified to generate the documentation we want to have.
Eh, maybe. I just find doing fancier things inside the compiler
to be a pain in the butt. Basically D > C++. And it is harder
to get code into dmd than it is to just do your own thing.
But really what matters is that we get something that doesn't
suck results wise. We could always change the ddoc
implementation later.
Which is why the doc generation utility should be a separate tool
and not built directly into the compiler. I understand Walter's
desire to have batteries included with D (doc generation,
unit-testing, profiling, ...) but that does not mean they should
be welded in. The DMD distribution could just as well provide a
set of auxiliary _standalone_ utilities for that.
DMD already has JSON output. Can't that be standardized and used
with a separate ddoc utility written in D?
