On Friday, 21 December 2012 at 18:31:48 UTC, Sönke Ludwig wrote:
Am 21.12.2012 18:05, schrieb Andrei Alexandrescu:
(...)

The cheat sheet in std.algorithm is unnecessary (though I liked the brief examples), but there's a lot of value in the symbols grouped by category (searching, comparison, ...) at the top. So we need
to have a means to group things in the new interface.

Ideally, we would invent some standard DDOC syntax to specify groups then. But generally an ungrouped list also has its advantages when you try to look something up _by name_. I've found myself in the past, skimming over the category table multiple times, looking for a certain function, until deciding that I had to guess the category first, which may not always be obvious.

So maybe keeping the manual category quick index table (and maybe putting it in a separate "Categories:" section) is a viable option for the time being? Most modules probably wouldn't need
one anyway.

What also would be nice is to have the methods inline, expandable.

Would that mean the Classes/Structs/... tables as f.ex. in std.datetime? So there would be a small clickable thing and all members would fly out below it as direct links?
and possibly with the short description?
What about different kinds of members? Only methods, all grouped by type or all in one list?

I'm just asking because I don't have any preferences for how such a thing should look like.

Other docs systems provide a sorted index of symbols and also the module tree can be further expanded to see the contained symbols. Both very handy features.

Reply via email to