Dave Whipp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Piers Cawley wrote:
>
>> I'm not arguing that the unit tests themselves shouldn't carry
>> documentation, but that documentation (if there is any) should be
>> aimed at the perl6 developer.
>
> Depends what you mean by "perl6 developer": is that the internals
> people, or the lucky user?
>
> Unit tests should be aimed at internals people: it would obviously be
> nice to have a few comments/POD in there.
>
> Our focus should be the user. There are really two deliverables:
> documentation that details how use the language; and a "language
> reference manual": which pins down every detail in an unambiguous
> manner, but not necessarily very readable. This reference could just
> be the set of tests; but they'd have to be sufficiently readable that
> an outsider could decode them without an Enigma machine.
And, as Michael has said, and I agree with him, our first deliverable
is that language reference manual.
--
Piers
"It is a truth universally acknowledged that a language in
possession of a rich syntax must be in need of a rewrite."
-- Jane Austen?
