On Mon, 24 Jan 2011 17:32:12 -0500, Andrew Wiley <[email protected]>
wrote:
Here's another approach:
When you think about it, what we're after is tagging unit tests as code
examples, so why not do exactly that with annotations?
@example(Foo.bar)
unittest {
//...
}
It means there are no new keywords to worry about, and this feels more
like
a job for metadata than a language feature to me. We'd probably have to
formalize adding parameters to annotations, but that's pretty much
inevitable if they're ever going to reach a useful state.
This changes the compiled language. A comment is safe to ignore, so it's
not part of the compiled language, similar to how ddoc comments are not
part of the compiled code. It fits perfectly with a ddoc comment.
Using a ddoc comment to trigger an example in ddoc feels perfectly
correct. What I'd like to do is make it less repetitive.
-Steve
