> Am 14.04.2015 um 14:24 schrieb Peter Uhnák <[email protected]>:
> 
> On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 2:19 PM, Christophe Demarey 
> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> 
> Le 14 avr. 2015 à 11:43, Esteban Lorenzano a écrit :
> 
> > how complete it is?
> > we would really like to think on:
> >
> > 1) include petitparser in Pharo
> > 2) allow the writing of class docs in MD format :)
> 
> I would prefer pillar for class / packages comments
> 
> I was quite surprised there are any MD defendants considering the pillar 
> push. But since diversity is (often) a good think maybe having something like 
> gt-inspector there would be cool where you can add this in whatever format 
> you want. (And maybe one day someone will write pillar to morphic/whatever 
> converter and it would be even cooler.)
> 
It is a difficult topic. I agree with anyone that MarkDown is not a good format 
for parsing. Pillar is the right thing to do here. But there is one point of 
MarkDown that is hard to beat. A MarkDown text is always good to read, eben 
while writing. In something like a class comment it would be easy to use. What 
we don't want is to write system documentation in a format that you need to 
convert first before you can see the result. It is either having a wysiwyg 
editor for those things with pillar below or a simple format that can both.

my 2 cents,

norbert


Reply via email to