On Thursday, 2 June 2016 at 19:53:29 UTC, Sönke Ludwig wrote:
So you actually display the documentation for your own Phobos fork, right?
Yeah.
This hasn't been an option for the DDOX based documentation for obvious reasons, though, so no reason to laugh at it..
Well, I think ddox is a competent implementation (of an iffy design, I don't love ddoc itself), and the fact that it is ahead on search engine rankings shows the page breakdown is more SEO-friendly than stock ddoc, among other advantages.
But what I find laughable is the surrounding ecosystem. It got added to the official website without a real support plan: a clear commitment was never made to fix Phobos issues, and nobody knew if we were actually going to transition from ddoc, or live side-by-side, or what. Certainly, nobody knew when, so there was no sense of urgency to fix the Phobos source regardless.
It just kinda sat in a dark corner of the website for years with little attention from the Phobos crew. I doubt many of them use it.
I feel the same thing is happening with dub by the way: we're told that it is the D package manager and there's code.dlang.org... but where's the follow-up action to back it up? It isn't included with the dmd zip and has very little marketing on the website. There's still a drive to get stuff into Phobos proper, or at least std.experimental, instead of dogfooding the package manager.
Sure, there's a link to it on the website, but there seems to be little personal use of it - and thus little drive to improve it - from among the Phobos core themselves.
