[Haskell-cafe] Markdown extension for Haddock as a GSoC project
cdsmith at gmail.com
Sat Apr 27 21:05:32 CEST 2013
Oops, forgot to reply all.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Chris Smith" <cdsmith at gmail.com>
Date: Apr 27, 2013 12:04 PM
Subject: Re: [Haskell-cafe] Markdown extension for Haddock as a GSoC project
To: "Bryan O'Sullivan" <bos at serpentine.com>
I don't agree with this at all. Far more important than which convention
gets chosen is that Haskell code can be read and written without learning
many dialects of Haddock syntax. I see an API for pluggable haddock syntax
as more of a liability than a benefit. Better to just stick to what we
have than fragment into more islands.
I do think that changing Haddock syntax to include common core pieces of
Markdown could be a positive change... but not if it spawns a battle of
fragmented documentation syntax that lasts a decade.
On Apr 27, 2013 11:08 AM, "Bryan O'Sullivan" <bos at serpentine.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 2:23 AM, Alistair Bayley <alistair at abayley.org>wrote:
>> How's about Creole?
>> Found it via this:
>> If you go with Markdown, I vote for one of the Pandoc implementations,
>> probably Pandoc (strict):
>> (at least then we're not creating yet another standard...)
> Probably the best way to deal with this is by sidestepping it: make the
> support for alternative syntaxes as modular as possible, and choose two to
> start out with in order to get a reasonable shot at constructing a suitable
> I think it would be a shame to bikeshed on which specific syntaxes to
> support, when a lot of productive energy could more usefully go into
> actually getting the work done. Better to say "prefer a different markup
> language? code to this API, then submit a patch!"
> Haskell-Cafe mailing list
> Haskell-Cafe at haskell.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Haskell-Cafe