Why I'm hesitating to switch to D

[Nick Sabalausky]

"Ary Manzana" <ary at esperanto.org.ar> wrote in message 
news:iufa8g$20o9$1 at digitalmars.com...
> On 6/29/11 6:25 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
>> On 6/29/2011 1:38 AM, James Fisher wrote:
>>> However, the case for using
>>> it for the website
>>> <https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/d-programming-language.org/blob/master/index.dd>
>>>
>>> is nonexistent (anyone disagree?).
>>
>> I do. Ddoc is:
>>
>> 1. Rather trivial to learn & use. A website/book/community devoted to
>> how to use it is completely unnecessary. It's fairly obvious how to use
>> it (for someone with a basic familiarity with HTML) by simply looking at
>> a couple examples.
>
> But you have to learn it nonetheless.
>

So? You have to learn markdown, etc, too. And I always find myself reaching 
for the syntax page whenever using one of those.

>>
>> 2. It automatically tracks the D language, so D code examples are always
>> properly highlighted.
>
> There are many tools to syntax highlight code using HTML. Making the 
> compiler (or some part of it) do it is... hmmm... it's not the compiler's 
> job!
>

Like Walter pointed out, it's far, far less maintenance and syncing-up work 
if it does use the actual compiler.

> Come on, it's not that hard to highlight with an external javascript (Nick 
> Sabalausky, please no comments :-P :-))

Heh, Jacob already said it for me :)

>>
>> 4. The D compiler and Ddoc are always in sync. No begging for updates
>> from 3rd parties, no lags even if they get right on incorporating
>> necessary updates.
>
> More job for you and your team, having to keep that in sync. And when D 
> becomes more popular I'm sure someone else will write a better ddoc, or 
> better ddocs, so why spend effort and time doing it in-sync with the 
> compiler?
>

Again, it's far, far less maintenance and syncing-up work if it does use the 
actual compiler.

>
> As someone else pointed out, the documentation for Phobos (or any library) 
> could be in a different subdomain without having to deal with the main 
> website styles or antyhing. And you can do the main website with another 
> framework.

Why use two separate systems when doing it all in one works fine? I really 
hate the trend over the last decade of switching to a totally different 
language for every damn little thing. It just creates *more* work, not less.