On 2010-08-04, at 7:43 pm, Darren Duncan wrote: > A parallel solution would be that POD can declare a version, similarly to how > Perl code can declare a Perl version, whose spec it is expected to be > interpreted according to.
I thought that was more or less how it worked anyway. You can make Pod do anything you want by extending or replacing the grammar (just like [any other part of] Perl 6). So an unrecognized directive should be an error like an unrecognized method or rule, but presumably you'd be using whatever modules are necessary to recognize them. On 2010-08-04, at 8:05 pm, Damian Conway wrote: >> I think it's a dreadful prospect to allow people to write documentation that >> they will have to rewrite when the Pod spec gets updated. Or, alternatively, >> to require all Pod parsers to be infinitely backwards compatible across all >> versions. :-( But nobody will have to rewrite anything, any more than you have to rewrite all your old code. Nor create a mega-parser that combines all possible versions. Just continue to use the original modules it was designed for, which, with proper versioning, will happen automatically. Isn't handling such versioning worries one of the best features of P6? (After all, docs aren't special to Perl — it's all just "code" that it will parse and process any way you tell it to.) Darren: > Explicit versioning is your friend. Yes, always! -David
