On 12/31/14 12:30 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 11:50:51AM -0800, Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
The problem with using only a single escape character is that it's
ambiguous when nested. If you write `X`Y`Z`, should it be interpreted as
$(X $(Y)) or $(X)Y$(Z)?
That issue is fairly obvious, as is its solution - backticks (or
whichever escape) don't nest; for nesting use the full syntax. Just like
bash/zsh.
Also, the people complaining about $(MACRO ...)) syntax aren't
complaining about the $(...) part specifically, but about the MACRO
part. No matter how you try to prettify it, $(MACRO x y z) is still
`MACRO x y z`. As long as you have a single syntax for all macros, the
syntax people won't be happy. What they are clamoring for is dedicated
syntax for the most common macros, so that they don't have to keep
repeating the MACRO part of the invocation.
That's a bit of a bummer because that seems a slippery slope to me. But
I guess we could standardize on markdown syntax.
Besides, ddoc syntax is really the least of our problems right now, what
with functionality issues like:
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9731
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13270
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13272
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13676
just to name a few. Everyone wants a new coffee machine but nobody cares
about nuclear reactor usability issues.
That's a very good point.
Andrei
