To clarify – I meant that I like the style of GoDoc, not the fact that you run the tool as a separate pass. That doesn't strike me as completely out of the question, but wouldn't be optimal.
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 11:32 AM, John Myles White <[email protected] > wrote: > No, I was talking about what I understood to be a design principle of > GoDoc: doc generation and parsing occurs at doc-gen time, not at run-time. > > Yes, you would have to make comments non-ignorable to get this to work. > > — John > > On Aug 26, 2014, at 12:44 AM, Job van der Zwan <[email protected]> > wrote: > > On Tuesday, 26 August 2014 00:04:41 UTC+2, John Myles White wrote: >> >> The issue is that you want to have all code documentation show up in >> REPL. In the GoDoc approach, this might require an explicit "build" step -- >> which is a non-trivial cost in usability. >> >> -- John >> > > I assume you talking about GoDoc as a tool? > > In case you are referring to comments as the source of documentation > instead of docstrings: I assume comments are now simply discarded during > compilation, making it impossible to use them for documentation, but if > that could be changed they should be just as valid as the format for > documentation, right? > > >
