NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.
All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report
POD vs XML
More |
Login
| Reply
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
In the near future, the probability is close to zero. In the distant
future, I'll be dead, and posterity can do whatever they like... :-) --lwall
Stories, comments, journals, and other submissions on use Perl; are Copyright 1998-2006, their respective owners.
POD isnt' so bad (Score:2)
Considering that one has to write documentation *first* in order to use POD. Too much complexity in what should be simple isn't really addressing the problem of not enough people document their modules. It's like people bitching about CPAN.pm yet they are usually the ones who either don't have a version or never bothered to read the documentation on what the appropriate version string is supposed to be. Close to 40% of the modules on CPAN either lack a version or POD or both. This isn't something XML is rea
Re:POD isnt' so bad (Score:1)
I don't think Matt's idea was to add complexity. He wants to add power. Now, I know that the two often walk in pairs, the latter as the intention and the former as the result.
I'm not in the camp of people that want to make Perl's documentation XML-based [mpe.mpg.de] (though I've come closer to it since that post, mostly for "enterprise" stuff and not for core Perl) but I could definitely use some extra metadata. The ActiveState people have been working on that (IIRC) and I'd love to hear about the output of th
-- Robin Berjon [berjon.com]
Re:POD isnt' so bad (Score:1)
Try it some time!
Reply to This
Parent