Worst Phobos documentation evar!

[Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d]

On Sun, 2014-12-28 at 16:41 +0000, Xinok via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Sunday, 28 December 2014 at 15:38:32 UTC, Suliman wrote:
> > Walter, can be documentation moved to wiki? ....
> 
> The trouble with that is the documentation for Phobos is
> generated using DDoc [1]. There's a philosophy behind using Ddoc, 
> such as the documentation is more likely to stay in sync with the 


Given this thread, "more likely" seems to imply 0%, so something of a 
#fail.

The problem is not DDoc per se (*), but the process that allowed the 
code into the repository without proper documentation. Trying to fix 
this problem seems to require people who want to contribute to have to 
clone Phobos and submit pull requests. I am not convinced this will 
actually happen. I agree a wiki isn't going to help, but maybe an 
email-based workflow could?

> code. Granted, using the wiki would make it easier for people to 
> contribute to the documentation, but by continuing to use Ddoc, we 
> advertise that feature of the D compiler and it will encourage us to 
> continue to improve it.
> 
> 
> [1] http://dlang.org/ddoc.html

(*) Every programming language seems to have to "do its own thing" 
thus requiring the language implementers to maintain a specialist 
tool.  Couldn't D just use Doxygen or JavaDoc and thereby leave 
maintenance of the tool to someone else?

-- 
Russel.
=============================================================================
Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200   voip: sip:russel.winder at ekiga.net
41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077   xmpp: russel at winder.org.uk
London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk  skype: russel_winder