|XP is just a number|
Re^6: Perl 6 Pod -- reinventing the wheel?by j3 (Friar)
|on Nov 25, 2006 at 08:43 UTC||Need Help??|
Sorry -- this thread seems to be blowing way out of proportion. I may have unintentionally hit a nerve.
I am still waiting for your explanation of the escaping syntax so that comments that include Perl arrays don't accidentally turn into Texinfo directives.
Oh. I don't think I understand what you're talking about. In that Texinfo example I was using in the OP, I figured:
I am still waiting for you to realize that any "solution" that doesn't allow people on any platform other than GNU/Linux to produce documents is completely unacceptable.
Last time I used MS Windows I either used ActivePerl and read the local docs with Firefox, or else installed Cygwin and read them using perldoc in a bash shell. I guess if you need docs accessible in some sort on MS Windows shell, and if makeinfo can't be made available for that environment, then GNU's makeinfo is out.
Why did you ignore those two points in your response? They are of supreme importance!
Sorry -- didn't mean to ignore them.
What if you already know and use markup X (where, I'm thinking Texinfo here)? If Perl6 Pod became "just like X", now your productivity at creating docs all of a sudden just went up substantially.What if all of the existing Perl users already have encountered POD in its current form? Again, one of the major principles of the Perl 6 redesign is "Don't change things arbitrarily. Changes require compelling justifications of cleanliness, simplicity, discoverability, and consistency."
Then their productivity writing docs stays the same I suppose. Look, I agreed that I don't think Texinfo is an order of magnitude better than Perl 6 Pod. I *do* think that Texinfo is fairly well-used and has tools already available. My comment you're replying to there is just additional considerations to think about: that is, even though Texinfo probably isn't 10 times better than Pod (your criteria), there are some less tangible benefits to it. That's all. Maybe those less-tangibles don't weigh very much here. Maybe they don't weigh much at all. That's what I was hoping to find out more about in my original post.
Damian volunteered to revise POD for Perl 6.And we're all very grateful for it.
We believe it is a solid system.
Sweet. Recall, in the original post I asked about if Perl 6 Pod is reinventing the wheel and (assuming it was), why. I was not implying that Perl 6 Pod wasn't solid.
As a side note, be very careful about even intimating that you can tell a volunteer developer what he or she should work on.
I hope I haven't ever given that impression. It's certainly none of my business what itches folks choose to scratch. Neither is it any of my business to try and guide the path of any project that isn't my own. I can still be curious about why that path was chosen though.
So again, with licensing problems, syntax problems, and the arbitrariness of such a dramatic change in the face of little benefit (and contra the previous two problems), what exactly again is the benefit?
Seems like there's some benefits as well as drawbacks (outlined elsewhere in this post and others). I was asking if maybe it would be simpler to use a pre-existing doc system (like, for example, maybe Texinfo, since it came to mind while I was posting, and since I've used it before and it seemed pretty good for this type of use, and since it is GPL'd (like one of Perl's licenses) and the FSF uses it for all their software).
Also, what in the world do you mean by "reinventing the wheel"?
I meant this:
Also, I've tried to use info many times and found that it never lived up to its name.
Personally, I tend to have to relearn it every time I touch it, but I figure that's just because I use man pages far more often (since they're much simpler to use). That said, I really like the DVI and PDF output generated from texi docs though. Also I like that you can put mathematics in your Texinfo docs.
(Also, it's "Perl 6".)I've been using "Perl6" because I thought it would be easier to google for later on.