On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 10:41 AM, Shawn H Corey <[email protected]>wrote:
> On 11/08/11 10:37 AM, Russ Allbery wrote: > >> Marc Green<[email protected]> writes: >> >> > Pod::Checker currently warns if there is an '=item' directive with no >>> > argument (as opposed to '=item *', for example). The description of >>> the >>> > warning is: >>> > "=item without any parameters is deprecated. It should either be >>> followed by >>> > * to indicate an unordered list, by a number (optionally followed by a >>> dot) >>> > to indicate an ordered (numbered) list or simple text for a definition >>> > list." >>> > perlpodspec states "Pod processors must tolerate a bare "=item" as if >>> it >>> > were "=item *"." Is Pod::Checker's behavior still in line with >>> > perlpodspec? Is the use of '=item' without any parameters deprecated? >>> > Or should that warning be removed from Pod::Checker? >>> >> I'd remove it. It seems like a style thing to me, and while I personally >> prefer =item *, I don't see a good reason to require that. >> >> > I'm not sure about that. Although a POD parser should be forgiving, a > checker should not. I think it should report things that are not spec even > if the parsers accept them. > I agree that a POD checker should report *all* errors/warnings, but is having an argumentless =item really a warning? By Pod::Checker's defintion, a warning indicates bad style, so that would mean that having an argumentless =item is bad style. Personally, I don't think it is; I find it a convenient shorthand. Do you disagree?
