Some feedback on the website.

[H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d]

On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 06:47:26PM +0000, deadalnix via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Wednesday, 16 December 2015 at 13:52:05 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> >>Also, ddoc always appeared to me like a big NIH syndrome.
> >
> >What would you have done instead?
> >
> 
> Honestly for D code itself, ddoc does just fine, but for the website,
> plain html or some known template format like . This is what people
> know.

Using ddoc for the website may be NIH, but the ability to easily display
snippets of D code without jumping through hoops is a big plus. Trying
to do syntax-highlighted D code in plain HTML (or any other web
authoring system, for that matter) is an exercise in masochism.

Having said that, though, using ddoc for the website leads to other
problems (e.g., the ongoing fiasco with XREF, LREF, whatever-REF and the
associated relative/absolute URL nightmare that a proper web authoring
system would have taken care of by default).


T

-- 
Жил-был король когда-то, при нём блоха жила.