• via Digitalmars-d-bugs (37/37) May 24 2016 https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16068

via Digitalmars-d-bugs <digitalmars-d-bugs puremagic.com> writes:

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16068

          Issue ID: 16068
           Summary: DDoc sections have serious design issues
           Product: D
           Version: D2
          Hardware: All
                OS: All
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P1
         Component: dmd
          Assignee: nobody puremagic.com
          Reporter: leandro.lucarella sociomantic.com

Created attachment 1598
  --> https://issues.dlang.org/attachment.cgi?id=1598&action=edit
DDoc output

I don't want to make a full rant about DDoc (although I think is to D what the
D preprocessor is to C/C++).

I found a very fundamental problem. According to how sections are parsed, you
can accidentally build new unintended sections just by formatting your
paragraphs.

For example:
---
        The contains() function is more convenient for trivial lookup
        cases:
        ---
        if (contains ("fubar", '!'))
            ...
        ---
---

This is a real example of text inside DDoc. This text produces the attached
output (basically "cases:" is interpreted as a new section).

I'm not sure this has a solution, is just the whole DDoc system seems too
broken by design, but if someone can think of any heuristics to make this more
sensible (maybe requiring sections to have an empty line before?), it would be
interesting to know.

--