A few notes on the ddox-based documentation

[Sönke Ludwig via Digitalmars-d]

Am 05.03.2017 um 02:47 schrieb Andrei Alexandrescu:
> Was just looking over these:
>
> https://dlang.org/library-prerelease/std/experimental/checkedint.html
> https://dlang.org/phobos-prerelease/std_experimental_checkedint.html
> http://dpldocs.info/experimental-docs/std.experimental.checkedint.html
>
> There are a few issues I found with the ddox-based library:
>
> * There's code coloring in inline code, which is a bit distracting.
> Syntax highlighting should be ideally limited to code blocks.

There is an option in DDOX now. Still have to open a PR against dpldocs.

> (...)
>
> * The headers "Author" and "License" appear even though they have no
> content. Clearly this could be fixed easily, but my understanding is
> that a great advantage of ddox over ddoc is its programmability, which
> should make it easy to make such adjustments.

Has this been solved by now, or is there still an example for this? 
Apart from not displaying it when it's not there, it should also not be 
displayed as separate sections. Current DDOX renders it as a small table 
by default, but we could also move it below the comments section as a 
page footer.

There are also some more improvements in the latest version:

- Search result ranking algorithm has been improved

- Functions in overview tables now show their argument names (kind of
   what the cheat sheet otherwise does)

- The types for template value parameters is now cross linked

- The prototype section now appears between the short and the long
   description so that the most important information is at the top

- Links to package.d modules are now part of the package entry in the
   navigation tree - instead of a separate "Package members" child entry

- Documentation groups (ditto) with mixed kinds of symbols are now
   aggregated (the description is rendered just once

- The module part of fully qualified names in text sections is
   automatically stripped, with the full name still appearing as a tool
   tip - not so important for Phobos, which relies on the *REF macros

- Some wrong heading levels have been fixed


We should also discuss the possibility of using Diskuto [1] as the 
comment engine.

[1]: https://github.com/rejectedsoftware/diskuto