tiny std.datetime question

[Rob T]

On Thursday, 17 January 2013 at 06:26:21 UTC, Jonathan M Davis 
wrote:
> On Thursday, January 17, 2013 07:15:14 Rob T wrote:
>> On Wednesday, 16 January 2013 at 13:07:48 UTC, n00b wrote:
>> > Hello, I'm kinda ashamed to ask that here, but std.datetime
>> > documentation is so complex...
>> 
>> You'll likely have a much easier time reading this.
>> 
>> http://vibed.org/temp/d-programming-language.org/phobos/std/datetime.html
>> 
>> Those pages are experimental upgrades to the current
>> documentation generator. The docs should be a complete 
>> duplicate
>> of the library documentation in here, it's just formatted a lot
>> better. I hope we'll see this soon in here.
>
> std.datetime is pretty much the poster child for why the 
> current format for
> the official documentation needs to be fixed. What's there 
> really isn't all that
> complicated, and it's well-documented, but it's just too hard 
> to sift through
> it all when all you have other than reading the entire page is 
> a bunch of
> unorganized, near useless links at the top.
>
> - Jonathan M Davis

Yeah, I was amazed at how much simpler things became after better 
formatting and organization was applied. Beforehand people were 
asking for std.datetime to be broken up, but no need anymore, 
although maybe the part on benchmarking and related (eg 
stopwatch) should be moved to its own module because those parts 
don't seem to really belong in there.

I hope the effort to move to the new format has not been stalled, 
as I have not seen much about it in a while. Do you know what the 
status is?

--rt