Re: =item * foo bar

[Russ Allbery]

Karl Williamson  writes:

> There is code in Pod::Simple that "tolerates" (meaning accepts as a
> bullet item) this pod line that would normally be illegal by
> perlpodspec.

> I wonder if anyone is around who remembers why this was added.  I didn't
> see details in an internet search

Pod::Man tolerated this prior to Pod::Simple (by removing the leading
bullet and, if this was the first =item in an =over block, treating it as
a declaration that the type would be bullet).

Looks like that behavior was there from the very first version of my
Pod::Man in 1999, so I suspect it was in Tom Christiansen's original
pod2man script.

So, the short answer is "very, very, very long-standing backward
compatibility."

-- 
#!/usr/bin/perl -- Russ Allbery, Just Another Perl Hacker
$^=q;@!>~|{>krw>yn{u<$$<[~|| 0gFzD gD,
 00Fz, 0,,( 0hF 0g)F/=, 0> "L$/GEIFewe{,$/ 0C$~> "@=,m,|,(e 0.), 01,pnn,y{
rw} >;,$0=q,$,,($_=$^)=~y,$/ C-~><@=\n\r,-~$:-u/ #y,d,s,(\$.),$1,gee,print

Re: Pod::Simple output as POD

[David E. Wheeler]

On May 8, 2018, at 18:48, John SJ Anderson  wrote:

> I suspect the plea for counsel was more intended for David, but I’ll pipe up 
> from the peanut gallery and say, “why not both?” It seems like the ideal 
> thing to put under a feature flag.

I’m sorry, I’ve lost all context on this thread after two years. What’s it for 
again? Flag sounds okay, but better is to use =encoding.

> Of course, that just changes this decision into “which one should be the 
> default and which one should need to be enabled?”, but perhaps thinking about 
> it in those terms will make it more clear which has the higher utility value?

Yeah, whichever is going to be more valuable for your intended audience.

D



signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP