On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 10:41 AM, Shawn H Corey shawnhco...@gmail.comwrote:
On 11/08/11 10:37 AM, Russ Allbery wrote:
Marc Greenpongu...@gmail.com writes:
Pod::Checker currently warns if there is an '=item' directive with no
argument (as opposed to '=item *', for example). The
On Aug 11, 2011, at 7:37 AM, Russ Allbery wrote:
=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
On 11/08/11 11:45 AM, Marc Green wrote:
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.
On 11/08/11 12:17 PM, David E. Wheeler wrote:
what if I want my block quote to contain a list, just nest them?
Yup.
--
Just my 0.0002 million dollars worth,
Shawn
Confusion is the first step of understanding.
Programming is as much about organization and communication
as it is about
On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 12:19:45PM -0400, Shawn H Corey wrote:
You're correct. Under Pod Commands, =item is listed as a bare item.
I don't know why there is a note for being forgiving for a valid
structure, but it's confusing. And, of course, if it's valid, it can't
be bad style.
What?
* Marc Green pongu...@gmail.com [2011-08-11T06:40:17]
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
