> > 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.