Blocking points for further D adoption

[ag0aep6g via Digitalmars-d]

On 06/05/2016 03:52 PM, David wrote:
> Yes those descriptions below are much better. I guess I glossed over
> them. I focused too much on the cheat sheet, because I assumed the cheat
> sheet was the quick link to function main pages (which seems to be the
> case). Perhaps this is a case where 'more' isn't better? I'm not quite
> sure what the cheat sheet really is providing...

The cheat sheet comes from the older style documentation which has all 
functions on one page and no generated listing of them. The cheat sheet 
provides a quick overview there, so that you don't have to scroll so 
much to find something.

For example, see the same page in the older style:

https://dlang.org/phobos/std_algorithm_comparison.html

In the newer style documentation, the cheat sheets don't really make 
sense. We're in the process of figuring out what to do about it.

> I mean if it was an example of common uses of the function that would be
> one thing. But I guess I'm not sure what information one is supposed to
> get from the 'cheat' sheet.

Maybe it's just a case of bad documentation. Do you think that all 
descriptions in the the cheat sheet are bad, or are some acceptable? For 
example, `either`'s description is this:

Return first parameter p that passes an if (p) test, e.g. either(0, 42, 
43) returns 42.

Is that good/bad/acceptable?