On Tuesday, 26 February 2013 at 23:44:32 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 2/26/2013 2:10 PM, foobar wrote:
All of the above describes the benefits of having standardized
documentation and
I agree with that. That has nothing to do with DDoc's specific
design compared
to other similar efforts. A quick survey of languages shows
that Ruby, Python,
Java, C#, and many others all have the same benefits but non
has the doc
generator built into the compiler/vm with all the problems
this entails.
Building ddoc into the compiler means it has access to the
semantic information that compiler provides, and it uses that
information. If it is not built in to the compiler, then the
options are:
1. require the user to type the information in twice
2. add parsing and semantic analysis capability to the doc
generator
I find (1) to be an unacceptable user experience, and (2) to be
not viable given our limited resources.
BTW, Javadoc apparently can only generate HTML. As Andrei has
demonstrated, Ddoc can generate html, pdf, and ebooks without
changing the Ddoc comments. I'm curious what fundamental
advantage you believe Javadoc has over Ddoc.
This is not true.
Javadoc uses a plugin architecture known as doclet.
http://docs.oracle.com/javase/7/docs/technotes/guides/javadoc/doclet/overview.html
There are quite a few plugins available, this one for example
generates UML diagrams from JavaDoc comments.
http://code.google.com/p/apiviz/
--
Paulo
