[Haskell-cafe] haddock backends
fuuzetsu at fuuzetsu.co.uk
Tue Jan 7 18:23:54 UTC 2014
On 07/01/14 13:10, Roman Cheplyaka wrote:
> * Mateusz Kowalczyk <fuuzetsu at fuuzetsu.co.uk> [2014-01-07 02:52:12+0000]
>> * This touches on frequently overlooked problem: Haddock targets more
>> than just the HTML back-end. We also have the LaTeX back-end and the
>> Hoogle back-end. This is why we don't allow things like verbatim
>> HTML in the markup, it doesn't make sense for anything but HTML.
>> Admittedly, LaTeX back-end could just generate the maths itself but
>> we then suddenly have to change the ‘verbatim’ block to the ‘LaTeX’
>> block. It's also unclear how Hoogle back-end would deal with this.
>> Even if we add the ‘LaTeX structure‘ to Haddock, I'm afraid that it
>> might end up with people just writing LaTeX for their documentation
>> which is useless for anyone not using that back-end.
> I see no reason why haddock should have a hoogle backend, as opposed to
> hoogle using the GHC API directly. It's just a hack that exists for
> historical reasons.
I also don't see why it's there but I don't think we can just remove
it. There are bugs reported against it which means that it's being
used. It is quite broken. I think a separate application to generate
the .hoo files would effectively be replicating Haddock.
> Other than that, HTML is the only backend really in use at the moment,
> I believe.
I have also thought this until we started considering removal of the
LaTeX back-end. It turns out that there are people who do use it.
In any case, I'm open to the back-end changes/removal/addition
discussions but I think it should be done in a separate thread.
More information about the Haskell-Cafe