On Thu, 27 Jul 2000, Barrie Slaymaker wrote: BS>Below is the message that inspired this. BS> BS>How about adding an C<=also> POD tag? It would have three syntaxes: BS> BS>=also for ... BS> BS>=also begin BS> BS>=also end BS> BS>These would be much like the existing three tags but "normal" POD BS>converters would completely ignore them. Then we could have: I don't understand the benefit of =also in this context. Could you please elaborate some more on this? Thinking of "=for example": Sounds nice to me, but keep these issues in mind: * A "=for" tag takes exactly *one* paragraph, i.e. you *must* write the example this way, without any blank lines in between =for example print "Addition example\n"; print 2+2,"\n" Alternatively, one would have to use =begin example ... =end * Pod::Parser currently leaves processing of =for and =begin ... =end completely up to the calling code. Basically I like this, but introducing special pre-defined =for directives might make it necessary to extend Pod::Parser. Then however you would give up control over the POD, e.g. when a "=for example" paragraph is automatically turned into a verbatim one. How would a "Pod::Example" then extract such example paragraphs using Pod::Parser? Therefore I'd suggest to keep Pod::Parser as is and to add code to e.g. Pod::ParseUtils to deal with predefined paragraphs. Still this requires to change the existing formatters in order to display such code. Another issue: Should all "example" paragraphs from one POD be accumulated into one script or do we need the possibility to have several different example code snippets? Just some thoughts... -Marek
