Am Thu, 08 Jan 2015 10:50:10 -0800 schrieb Andrei Alexandrescu <seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org>:
> On 1/8/15 9:16 AM, Kiith-Sa wrote: > > > > This is a problem with naming, not with DDox. It would look bad > > regardless of generator, or regardless of documentation at all. You > > could make it look slightly less bad, but you might end up hurting > > other documentation. (I'm not implying it should be renamed (bad > > reason for breaking compatibility), but I see no point in changing > > doc generation just because of some bad naming.) > > Sigh. No matter how I look at it, the same name repeated FOUR times > only evokes Java's factory factory etc. -- Andrei These 4x digest variants never occur in real code though: http://dlang.org/library/std/digest/digest/digest.digest.html is a class member function. You never use the full name, it's always instance.digest() http://dlang.org/library/std/digest/digest/digest.html could be used with the full name. But ironically the name is not used outside of std.digest so it's usually not necessary to use the full name. So it doesn't look nice in the docs but it's not a huge problem when writing code.
