Showing unittest in documentation (Was Re: std.unittests [updated] for review)

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

On 1/24/11 3:36 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Jan 2011 16:03:24 -0500, Andrei Alexandrescu
> <SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org> wrote:
>> I find documented unittests attractive mainly because they're
>> _simple_. As soon as we start to add that kind of stuff... exponential
>> decay.
>
> It's only not simple if you want it to be. The /** Example: */ simple
> method is also covered. Let's also not forget that the end result is
> generated documentation, not the comments. All this 'non-simplicity' is
> going to be hidden there.

I think I worked too much with Walter because I'm almost thinking on his 
behalf. The thing is, at this point Walter (and me too) has a sympathy 
for language changes that remove undue limitations, and an aversion for 
language changes that introduce new stuff that the user would learn.

So if we go to Walter with: "Hey, we can currently document a variety of 
declaration, but not unittests. Let's allow documenting unittests as 
well" he'd be like, "heh, that sounds great... okay". But if we go to 
him with "hey, here's this new feature that needs these syntactic 
additions and these semantics and and has several nontrivial effects 
and..." then the chance of adoptions are seriously harmed.

Let's stick with KISS. Though I agree there are many improvements that 
can be brought to ddoc, I don't want a new feature, only to be able to 
document unittests.


Andrei