Ddoc macro syntax

[rikki cattermole via Digitalmars-d]

On 17/09/2016 1:42 AM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 03:10:11PM +0200, Marco Leise via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>> Am Fri, 16 Sep 2016 13:16:35 +0200
>> schrieb Jacob Carlborg <doob at me.com>:
>>
>>> My biggest issue with the macros is not the syntax (I don't like
>>> that either) but it's that one needs to use them too much.
>>
>> Same for me. I feel like this discussion is probably
>> picking out the wrong enemy. Sure macros need some way of
>> escaping, but I'm happy with anything that replaces macros in
>> common use case scenarios with more readable syntax, just like
>> the design goals stated back in the day:
>>
>> 1. It looks good as embedded documentation, not just after it
>>    is extracted and processed.
>> 2. It's easy and natural to write, i.e. minimal reliance on
>>    <tags> and other clumsy forms one would never see in a
>>    finished document.
>>
>> The abundance of macros for common formatting tasks like
>> emphasis, (un)ordered lists and - a while ago - inline code,
>> contradicts point 2 when compared to a bottom up approach,
>> where you take a look at some plain text documents and ask
>> yourself: If there is only ASCII, how do people use it
>> creatively to convey the idea of formatting in a natural way
>> and can we deduce rules from that to automatically transform
>> text into PDF/HTML/CHM/...
>> I want to think that markdown came into existence like this.
>> Someone sat down and formalized a list of things people
>> already do and slapped a name on it.
> [...]
>
> We have already added `...` last year for code snippets, which made
> things much more readable than writing $(D ...) everywhere. Now we're
> asking for emphasis and other things like that, that eventually,
> basically leads to reinventing markdown.
>
> So why not just implement markdown in the first place?!
>
> We can still have macros for the more complicated things, but having
> markdown as a baseline syntax means that you can almost get away without
> using any macros for 90% of documentation, which is a big plus.
>
>
> T

We wouldn't even have to use headings like markdowns because of ddocs! 
(I quite like that part).