Some feedback on the website.

[Jakob Ovrum via Digitalmars-d]

On Friday, 18 December 2015 at 07:37:40 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> On 2015-12-18 00:50, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>
>> * Many functions don't have "Parameters:", "Returns:", or 
>> "Throws:"
>> sections. Those that respectively take parameters, return 
>> non-void, or
>> throw, should have one each.
>
> I think we need to be better at enforcing this in the pull 
> requests. I see a lot of this [2] in PR's.

After further changes I was able to add `Params:` and `Returns:` 
with some valuable information, but it also comes with a fair 
amount of redundancy. I think a lot of our current functions have 
more than adequately documented parameters and return values, 
just without using sections. Some redundancy can be a good thing, 
but for most of those functions I don't see how simple-mindedly 
adding purely redundant information is impactful.

The important thing is not those sections but that parameters and 
return values are documented.