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

[deadalnix via Digitalmars-d]

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.