On 6/21/07, Smylers wrote:
Mark Overmeer writes:
> The boundary between freedom and anacharchy is faint.
Indeed. And I'd much rather we err on the side of anarchy.
I'd much rather we didn't err at all! Just because something isn't
"perfect" doesn't mean it's an error, or that it's not worth
Hi Larry.
You wrote:
: Please can you explain the reasoning for choosing antecedent, rather
: than successor?
I think having to pick either one or the other is likely a design smell.
Maybe it would be better to have predeclared extractors than to have a
search strategy baked half-heartedly int
brian asked:
Couldn't most of this be figured out by making Pod6 extensible (or
whatever the right term is). Pod6 would be more of the syntax and basic
operation, but other people could have custom directives that their
Pod6 translators and formatters could then use. That is, not all of
this has
Juerd wrote:
Damian Conway skribis 2007-06-21 11:45 (+1000):
A dedicated OO documentation tool could certainly do a better job in that
case, I heartily agree. I'm looking forward to using one.
This dedicated OO documentation must be core, because Perl itself is
heavily OO.
Yes. I completel
On 6/21/07, Smylers wrote:
Please can you explain the reasoning for choosing antecedent, rather
than successor?
I assume because it's easier for someone to refer to something that
was just written in the preceding line(s) than something that hasn't
been written yet. Of course, documentation
On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 09:21:13PM +0100, Smylers wrote:
: Damian Conway writes:
:
: > Here's the first draft (documented in Pod 6, of course ;-).
: >
: > =head3 Ambient aliases
: >
: > The C> formatting code specifies an B antecedent>.
:
: Please can you explain the reasoning for choosing ante
At 11:23 PM +0100 6/21/07, Smylers wrote:
Has Larry yet decreed whether Web will be bundled with Perl 6?
I believe that what Larry has said is that there are no official core
modules, but that people who distribute Perl can bundle whatever they
want, and that such choice was to be encouraged.
Smylers skribis 2007-06-21 23:23 (+0100):
> Of course. But there's a big difference between the attitude of 'let's
> do the best we can right now' and 'this is our one chance to do this
> right'.
I think that for some things, mainly for setting community standards
(Web, POD, ...), this is our one
Moritz Lenz writes:
> Smylers wrote:
>
> > Moritz Lenz writes:
> >
> > > Web is hopefully "CGI done right"
> >
> > ... why are we hoping that it will be "done right"?
>
> Because we hope we learned from the past. There are several other
> modules that fullfill most of CGI's tasks, some of th
Juerd Waalboer writes:
> Smylers skribis 2007-06-21 21:33 (+0100):
>
> > I disagree. perldoc.perl.org was started by JJ, gained popularity,
> > and then got awarded the official blessing of the onion. Over the
> > years there have many several sites with Perl documenation.
>
> That's not a way
Smylers wrote:
> Moritz Lenz writes:
>
>> You could help by contributing some suggestions to what the new "Web"
>> module should be able to do, and how so. Web is hopefully "CGI done
>> right", and still in its early planning stage.
>
> Web module? This is the first I've heard of it. Where is
Smylers skribis 2007-06-21 21:33 (+0100):
> That doesn't follow.
It's an opinion.
> I disagree. perldoc.perl.org was started by JJ, gained popularity, and
> then got awarded the official blessing of the onion. Over the years
> there have many several sites with Perl documenation.
That's not a
Juerd Waalboer writes:
> Damian Conway skribis 2007-06-21 11:45 (+1000):
>
> > A dedicated OO documentation tool could certainly do a better job in
> > that case, I heartily agree. I'm looking forward to using one.
>
> This dedicated OO documentation must be core, because Perl itself is
> heavil
Damian Conway writes:
> Here's the first draft (documented in Pod 6, of course ;-).
>
> =head3 Ambient aliases
>
> The C> formatting code specifies an B antecedent>.
Please can you explain the reasoning for choosing antecedent, rather
than successor?
I'm not disagreeing with your choice, merel
Darren Duncan writes:
> At 6:37 PM +0100 6/21/07, Smylers wrote:
>
> > Web module? This is the first I've heard of it. Where is it being
> > planned, if not on this list?
>
> It was being discussed on the perl6-users list, last year.
Thanks.
Smylers
At 6:37 PM +0100 6/21/07, Smylers wrote:
Moritz Lenz writes:
> You could help by contributing some suggestions to what the new "Web"
module should be able to do, and how so. Web is hopefully "CGI done
right", and still in its early planning stage.
Web module? This is the first I've heard o
Smylers reported:
I was with you right up until the mention of C<=encoding>; what's that
got to do with anything?
C&P bug. Patched. Thanks!
Damian
Chaddaï Fouché writes:
> I'm quite surprised by this debate... To me it seems a clear rule that
> state that "if a line begin with "=" then it starts a POD section" is
> way easier to understand than "a line beginning by = will start a POD
> section except if it is in a Perl statement, or in a :to
Damian Conway writes:
> Here's the first draft (documented in Pod 6, of course ;-).
>
> Feedback and suggestions are most welcome.
>
> Note that C<=alias> is a fundamental Perldoc directive, like C<=begin>
> or C<=for>; it is I an instance of an
> L. Hence there is no paragraph
> or delimited fo
brian d foy writes:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Smylers
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > brian d foy writes:
> >
> > > In article
> > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Damian
> > > Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > No. It's Pod. *Any* line that begins with '=begin' always starts a Po
Moritz Lenz writes:
> You could help by contributing some suggestions to what the new "Web"
> module should be able to do, and how so. Web is hopefully "CGI done
> right", and still in its early planning stage.
Web module? This is the first I've heard of it. Where is it being
planned, if not on
Mark Overmeer writes:
> * Jonathan Scott Duff ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [070616 20:15]:
>
> > You mention OOP. For Perl 5 we have a standard, if very general,
> > syntax and "open" semantics that have allowed people to implement
> > OOP in a variety of ways. This was all well and good for a while
> >
Mark Overmeer writes:
> * Smylers ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [070616 09:09]:
> >
> > You're concerned that an aspect of Perl 6 might have too much
> > freedom? Isn't Perl all about giving users freedom to choose their
> > own way of doing something?
>
> Why treat documentation as a second-class citize
Jonathan Lang writes:
> The only other thing that I'll continue to lobby for is that the line
> starting with a block comment's termination tag should _not_ be
> considered part of the comment, save for the termination tag itself.
> Programmers are likely to be surprised when text that follows a
>
Mark Overmeer writes:
> * Smylers ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [070616 08:44]:
>
> > With these new Pod rules it's possible to entirely remove Pod from a
> > file without knowing _anything_ about the host language. That
> > permits Pod to be used to document just about anything; all you need
> > to allow
Larry Wall writes:
> I have a problem with both extremes, and I want to solve it with a
> dose of postmodern apathy. It may seem a bit insane, but I think that
> in
>
> print qq:to/END/
>
> =for whatever
>
> END
>
> I would prefer that the =for is considered Pod by any standard Po
All,
I am pleased to announce the release of Muldis::DB version 0.0.0 for
Perl 5 on CPAN. You can see it now, with nicely HTMLized
documentation, at:
http://search.cpan.org/dist/Muldis-DB/
This is the first formal release of Muldis::DB, which began
development last year (under the tempor
On 6/21/07, brian d foy wrote:
Couldn't most of this be figured out by making Pod6 extensible (or
whatever the right term is). Pod6 would be more of the syntax and
basic operation, but other people could have custom directives that
their Pod6 translators and formatters could then use.
Yeah, t
> The outcome is that poddoc can be Pod6 "pure" and perldoc can be (as its
> name suggests) documentation for Perl.
Sorry to reply to myself twice.
Making poddoc independent of Perl 6 opens the doors a little further for
having pythondoc and phpdoc and yourlanguageheredoc which extract the POD
> The outcome is that poddoc can be Pod6 "pure" and perldoc can be (as its
> name suggests) documentation for Perl.
I failed to mention that it also has the benefit that developers can read the
perldoc if they care about method details - or they could read poddoc if they
only want a 7000 ft view
> > The solution is simple, you know, Mark. Why not just write up your own
> > alternate S26, redesigning Pod 6 the way you think it should work, and
> > then publish your proposal for consideration here?
>
> Couldn't most of this be figured out by making Pod6 extensible (or
> whatever the right te
In article
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Damian
Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mark Overmeer wrote:
>
> [...yet another honest and heartfelt plea for Pod 6 to be something
> entirely different from what it is currently designed to be.]
>
> The solution is simple, you know, Mark. Why not just write u
Damian Conway skribis 2007-06-21 11:45 (+1000):
> A dedicated OO documentation tool could certainly do a better job in that
> case, I heartily agree. I'm looking forward to using one.
This dedicated OO documentation must be core, because Perl itself is
heavily OO. If we are to ever have consisten
Mark Overmeer wrote:
[...yet another honest and heartfelt plea for Pod 6 to be something
entirely different from what it is currently designed to be.]
The solution is simple, you know, Mark. Why not just write up your own
alternate S26, redesigning Pod 6 the way you think it should work, and
the
* Damian Conway ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [070621 01:45]:
> Mark Overmeer wrote:
> >This is exactly the form of documentation you do *not* want the
> >user to write, for various reasons:
> Well, I agree it is the form that "you" (singular, specific) do not want;
> but I'm not sure it's bad for "you" (p
35 matches
Mail list logo
