-preview switches

[Jacob Carlborg]

On 2020-04-01 19:51, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:

> So whoever did this 
> replicated the entire file but just without any actual definitions, and 
> tagged them for ddoc. I think this was the wrong approach, we should 
> have tagged them and included the real definitions if version(CoreDdoc) 
> was true.

That was me. Do you suggest that the Ddoc comments are moved to the 
actual definitions and set the `Darwin` version identifier when 
`CoreDdoc` is enabled? That might have been better, in this case.

It's difficult to know how to deal with this the best way. Different 
modules solve this in different way.s We don't seem to have a standard 
way to deal with this. In this case it might have worked, because this 
module doesn't have any dependencies on other modules. But in other 
cases that might not be the case. You need to make sure those symbols in 
the other modules are available when building the docs.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg