Aaron Sherman wrote:
=table C$_ | C$x | Type of Match Implied | Matching Code
=row Any | CodeC $ | scalar sub truth | match if
C$x($_)
That's (the above comments aside) the same thing, and as I said when
Luke suggested it, it seems fine if that's the way we'd prefer to go.
Aaron Sherman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Still, tables are useful, so here's a simple way to get the kind of
table we see above, without the HTMLish trap of pseudo-layout:
Because one of the features of POD is that documentation tends to be
readable in markup form, an C=-introduced markup
Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon wrote:
Aaron Sherman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Still, tables are useful, so here's a simple way to get the kind of
table we see above, without the HTMLish trap of pseudo-layout:
Because one of the features of POD is that documentation tends to be
readable in markup form,
Aaron Sherman writes:
Larry Wall wrote:
$_ $xType of Match ImpliedMatching Code
== = ==
Any Code$ scalar sub truth match if $x($_)
This bit of POD made me think about POD's lack of tabular formatting,
On Sat, Aug 21, 2004 at 12:03:10AM -0600, Luke Palmer wrote:
: I've already had my epiphany about POD, though, so I'll spare doing it
: again. In short, there are two things that I see about POD that need to
: change:
:
: =over
:
: =item 1)
:
: C=directive lines shouldn't have to be in their
L:uke, just a note before I reply to you specifically: I understand your
concerns, and I have no interest in blurring the line between
presentation and markup, which I think ultimately is where your concern
comes from. In fact, if you re-read what I wrote (and what I write
below), you'll see
$_ $xType of Match ImpliedMatching Code
== = ==
Any Code$ scalar sub truth match if $x($_)
How about making paragraphs that have a line like the divider one above
special? By simply parsing the =
Luke Palmer wrote:
Aaron Sherman writes:
H C$_ | C$x | Type of Match Implied | Matching Code
T Any | CodeC $ | scalar sub truth | match if C$x($_)
Oh, and BTW: My mailer seems to have snuck some extra noise in there. I
think it got confused and thought there was
Maybe this train has already left the station, but I find myself
preferring Kwiki syntax to POD these days... any chance we could
use Kwiki with WAFL for the Perl 6 POD? That of course has
already got tables.
(Still bracketing with the =for ... =cut directives, though.)
Just a thought...
--
Luke Palmer wrote:
On the other hand, Larry had a good point. Why couldn't we do:
=begin table
...
=end table
For some sufficiently simple ...? Obviously this gives the formatter
control over how the table is formatted, which is arguably a bad thing
since it won't be implemented (POD tools are
10 matches
Mail list logo
