Enhancement: issue error on all public functions that are missing ddoc sections

deadalnix via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d at puremagic.com
Thu Mar 19 17:08:15 PDT 2015

On Thursday, 19 March 2015 at 23:45:03 UTC, bachmeier wrote:
> On Thursday, 19 March 2015 at 22:14:02 UTC, Jeremy Powers wrote:
>> As for the documentation - yeah, don't write docs that 
>> duplicate what is
>> there in the method signature.
> I'm not a big fan of that. It's one of those slippery slope 
> things. The documentation should be written for a new D user, 
> but the person that writes the method has a very different view 
> of what constitutes duplication. There's too much of that 
> attitude in the existing documentation. If it really is 
> duplication, that should be a decision made by someone else, 
> preferably someone that doesn't know much about the library.

Ok let's be clear. This kind of overpedantic commenting is a good 
thing in a public, widespread API, like phobos's. Especially 
since you can generate documentation from it, this is going to be 
googled for.

That is very bad idea in the general case.

More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list