Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from August 2017
Re: perldoc rewrite
From: Graham Knop
August 14, 2017 16:29
Re: perldoc rewrite
Message ID: CAM=m89Fn1DCr_fLK5JL63tyA_REFifkJFGdRq=Q2eke+qKSmRQ@mail.gmail.com
On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 5:49 PM, herbert breunung <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Dear Porters
> I posted here some weeks ago my wish for function and var index page but
> the issue behind it turned out to be much bigger.
> Thats why I currently plan a rewrite of perldoc tool. mark and brian are on
> board and i just had fruitful discussions and input on and off YAPC
> including damian and sawyer.
How would this index be used?
> Even it will take some time to get even a functionaly equivalent
> replacement (first before I can add features),
> I already want to discuss with you some changes that will be needed.
> An detailed featurelsit will be posted later on blogs.perl but for now i
> want to announce the stuff that might be most disturbing from your point.
> 1. I want make parameter parsing of perldoc stricter, so only input that
> completely makes sense will be run.
> 2. at some point searchable keywords have to be included in the pod via X<>
> tags and in the main perl.POD the references to oterh pages has to be
> converted to
> L<...> so i can categorize them by the X<in front> to get sensible search
> categories without guessing too much,
> plus it would make it more similar what perldoc.org shows.
Which part of perldoc.org are you talking about? It doesn't use X<>
tags for indexes or anything else.
> 3. I need the -M key (CLI option) for module related stuff. Since sawyer
> already told me I can't have the -m
> the -M sems a good candidate since its very rarely used (alt formatter
> Module) and the we have good precedent of changing one very seldom used flag
> of perldoc by mark in past.(sorry but details to that are at home at my main
This sounds like a terrible idea. Why can't you pick a different letter?
There are plenty of users of the Pod::Perldoc API, both as a library
and as extensions. This sounds like a lot of potential breakage for a
change that is not well explained.