On Friday, March 11, 2011 12:08:19 Nicholas wrote: > == Quote from novice2 (so...@noem.ail)'s article > > > Nicholas Wrote: > > > As a result of (my) complaining and being a huge fan of XMind, I > > > decided to try to organize the library for my own references as I > > > encounter new sections of it. I have a decent portion of it in place > > > now. I thought I'd post a link in case it can help anyone else out as > > > well. > > > > > > > > > http://polish.slavic.pitt.edu/~swan/theta/Phobos.xmind > > > > may be you could expose/share your work via service like > > http://www.xmind.net/share/ > > because not everybody have installed xmind... > > Good point. I'll do that on Monday when I'm back at the office. I updated > std.datetime to 2.052 yesterday (didn't realize there was a new version > until then).
LOL. Yeah. It's practically not even related to the previous version. The few items that it had were moved to core.time and left in std.datetime, but it's very small in comparison to what was added. What's there _is_ thoroughly documented though. So, depending on what your problem is with Phobos' documentation is (I don't know what your problem with it is), maybe you'll like that better. If your problem with the documentation has to do with the fact that the links on the top aren't organized (which they obviously need to be), then that problem still needs to be dealt with. There has been _some_ work in that direction though. Andrei has been working to improve how std.algorithm's links are laid out, and there has been a person or two who have been working on ways to improve the way all that is laid out in general, but it hasn't yet reached the point that Phobos' basic documentation layout has been truly fixed. Still, it's good to have as much documentation as we do, even if it could use some improvements as far as layout goes. - Jonathan M Davis
