Verified documentation comments

[Brian Schott]

On Thursday, 15 November 2012 at 20:58:55 UTC, Marco Leise wrote:
> Am Thu, 15 Nov 2012 20:15:15 +0100
> schrieb Andrej Mitrovic <andrej.mitrovich at gmail.com>:
>
>> Doing semantics in comments is beyond overkill.
>
> They are DDoc and attached to a symbol. I've seen IDEs give
> information on errors in documentation comments on the fly.
> If at some point we can also automatically document thrown
> exceptions I'm happy :)
> I'm all for compiler warnings where they are cheap. Why wait
> for someone to tell you, that your documentation has obvious
> errors that could have been statically checked during its
> generation ?
> Let's add this as a nice-to-have on the new Wiki. Someone who
> is interested in hacking on DMD can pick it up then.

One way to solve this and similar issues may be to add D support 
to PMD. (http://pmd.sourceforge.net/). Many rules can be created 
as XPath expressions, so if someone wants a new check on their 
code, they can just write it. A side effect of doing this is that 
we'd have a javacc-compatible grammar for D.