Re: Gripes about Pod6 (S26)

2010-02-10 Thread Patrick R. Michaud
On Fri, Feb 05, 2010 at 03:43:04PM -0500, Austin Hastings wrote: > Second, POD is not XML, and it definitely isn't DOCBOOK. Why do I > need magic reserved words like TOC and APPENDIX? I'm not writing a > book, I'm writing code. And if I was writing a book, I wouldn't be > dumb enough to write it in

Re: Gripes about Pod6 (S26)

2010-02-10 Thread Damian Conway
Carl observed: > Partly that is because documentation isn't at the forefront of things > that need to be implemented for Perl 6 to be useful, so it's kind of > lagging behind the rest. > > Partly it's because Damian is the "owner" of that synopsis, and he > practices a kind of "drive-by-updating"

Re: Gripes about Pod6 (S26)

2010-02-10 Thread Jon Lang
John Gabriele wrote: > Personally, I've always thought that Perl has a very natural feel to > it, and deserves a doc markup format that's also natural: [Markdown] > (and [Pandoc]'s Markdown has just the right additions, IMO). > > [Markdown]: http://daringfireball.net/projects/markdown/ > [Pandoc]:

r29675 - in docs/Perl6/Spec: . S32-setting-library

2010-02-10 Thread pugs-commits
Author: lwall Date: 2010-02-10 18:10:26 +0100 (Wed, 10 Feb 2010) New Revision: 29675 Modified: docs/Perl6/Spec/S03-operators.pod docs/Perl6/Spec/S09-data.pod docs/Perl6/Spec/S32-setting-library/Containers.pod Log: [Spec] squash [;] fossils noticed by eternaleye++ Modified: docs/Perl6/Sp

Re: Gripes about Pod6 (S26)

2010-02-10 Thread John Gabriele
On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 9:31 AM, John Gabriele wrote: > Personally, I've always thought that Perl has a very natural feel to > {snip} Gah. Sorry for the quasi-double-post. I posted on google groups, it didn't show up, then I jumped the gun and posted a similar message to the ML. ---John

Re: Gripes about Pod6 (S26)

2010-02-10 Thread John Gabriele
On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 8:50 AM, Mark Overmeer wrote: > * John Gabriele (jmg3...@gmail.com) [100209 14:31]: >> [Markdown]: http://daringfireball.net/projects/markdown/ >> [Pandoc]: http://johnmacfarlane.net/pandoc/ >> [reST]: http://docutils.sourceforge.net/rst.html > > Or, more Perl like: >  [OOD

Re: Gripes about Pod6 (S26)

2010-02-10 Thread Mark Overmeer
* John Gabriele (jmg3...@gmail.com) [100209 14:31]: > [Markdown]: http://daringfireball.net/projects/markdown/ > [Pandoc]: http://johnmacfarlane.net/pandoc/ > [reST]: http://docutils.sourceforge.net/rst.html Or, more Perl like: [OODoc] http://perl.overmeer.net/oodoc/ http://perl.overmeer.net/oo

Re: Gripes about Pod6 (S26)

2010-02-10 Thread John Gabriele
Personally, I've always thought that Perl has a very natural feel to it, and deserves a doc markup format that's also natural: [Markdown] (and [Pandoc]'s Markdown has just the right additions, IMO). [Markdown]: http://daringfireball.net/projects/markdown/ [Pandoc]: http://johnmacfarlane.net/pandoc

Re: Gripes about Pod6 (S26)

2010-02-10 Thread Carl Mäsak
Austin (>): > I've been doing a bunch of NQP and PIR coding, where Pmichaud++ has been > trying to support some kind of POD syntax. With the release of the S26 > draft, he has tightened the parsing to follow more of the rules laid out in > the spec, and after a few months, I've noticed that the tre