On 1 January 2015 at 05:50, Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote: > Hello, > > > In wake of the recent discussions on improving ddoc syntax we're looking at > doing something about it. Please discuss any ideas you might have here. > Thanks! > > One simple starter would be to allow one escape character, e.g. the backtick > (`), as a simple way to expand macros: instead of $(MACRO arg1, arg2) one > can write `MACRO arg1, arg2`.
I don't really have any particular opinions on this topic, but the only feeling I've really had in the past is, "why is it so different from doxygen?" Most people are already familiar with doxygen. Why is doxygen insufficient? Is there a reason ddoc was invented rather than supporting the practically-industry-standard doxygen format from the start?