Better ddoc defaults?

[Yuxuan Shui via Digitalmars-d]

On Friday, 10 March 2017 at 07:58:36 UTC, Petar Kirov 
[ZombineDev] wrote:
> On Thursday, 9 March 2017 at 21:08:17 UTC, Yuxuan Shui wrote:
>> I'm using ddoc for the first time. I was naively expecting 
>> something resembles dlang.org, and the results is a bit 
>> disappointing. So I looked at dlang.org and realized lots and 
>> lots of ddoc templates are required to achieve that.
>>
>> As the developer of a tiny package that nobody cares, I want 
>> to have a nice looking documents page, but I don't want put 
>> too much (or any!) time into it. And I don't care whether my 
>> documents have any "personality". I guess a lot people would 
>> agree.
>>
>> So why don't we make the defaults more beautiful? Or make the 
>> dlang.org templates easier to adopt for average users?
>
> My favorite one is: https://github.com/MartinNowak/scod.
>
> BTW, the default ddox (the one that comes with dub) is getting 
> an upgrade soon: 
> https://github.com/rejectedsoftware/ddox/pull/149
> https://github.com/rejectedsoftware/ddox/pull/150.

I tried ddox, and it worked pretty well. Only problem is that, 
ddox uses the json output of dmd, which is different from dmd -D 
result. dmd -D will include the then-branch of static-ifs and 
version blocks that's been compiled in, but the json output 
doesn't.

Is this by design? Or can we make the json output consistent with 
the ddoc output?