> I have to redo my tools once more, and am sick of my current `(doc ...)` 
> and `@doc` format, *and the resulting dependency on McFly.* 

Could you elaborate on your experience with this? For a module with 
embedded docs I'd want to treat them the same as tests: in a special 
submodule which results in "build-time" dependencies instead of runtime 
dependencies. With the current package build system, users could install my 
package with embedded docs in pre-built form without installing build-time 
dependencies using `raco pkg install 
--catalog https://pkg-build.racket-lang.org/server/built/catalog/ --binary 
mypackage`, assuming they're running the same version of Racket as the 
package build server.

My gut instinct is that I'd like to explore making pre-built package 
installations more automatic and pain-free for package users, rather than 
asking package developers to avoid adding dependencies entirely by using 
special comments and separately installed special tools. Putting docs in 
specially-formatted comments means running my code in DrRacket won't check 
my docs for syntax errors.

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Racket Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to