Improving ddoc

[Rikki Cattermole via Digitalmars-d]

On 1/01/2015 1:54 p.m., ketmar via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Thu, 01 Jan 2015 13:44:23 +1300
> Rikki Cattermole via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d at puremagic.com> wrote:
>
>> I was thinking one simpler.
>> $(D myfunction, $0)
>
> it's not really better than current Ddoc. sure, you can use it to write
> custom doc processor, but you can't store state with it, and you still
> have to escape alot. this actually making Ddoc *worse*, as it adds
> complexity.

At the very least, atleast the compiler wouldn't need changes per each 
different doc processor.
I can understand state being an issue. But this atleast will use CTFE to 
extend DDOC just enough to make it more useful.

For full AST access which basically has state local to the function, its 
too much code on the compiler side to make it worth while right now. But 
this is a nice compromise IMO.