On 12/17/15 3:06 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> Oh, God, please no. Just use vibe.d and be done with it. We obviously
> need a proper programming language to generate dconf.org.

We are already using vibe.d for the Phobos page-per-name documentation. As far as I can tell the initiative has been a qualified success.

The main problem there is that there are not enough folks to maintain the vibe-related artifacts. Basically when Sönke is busy with something else, any issue may wait indefinitely. (I haven't followed that lately, possibly things have improved as of late.)

In order to make the use of vibe.d entirely successful across dlang.org and dconf.org, we need to show robust gains from using it for Phobos. As virtually the sole maintainer of dconf.org, I'd feel definitely motivated to use vibe.d if there was good evidence of thriving collaboration around the use of it on http://dlang.org/library.

Jacob, are you willing to ramp up you contribution to the vibe.d-related parts of Phobos? That would go a long way toward convincing everyone of the productivity gains of using it instead of ddoc (or others).


Andrei

On 12/17/15 5:32 PM, deadalnix wrote:
> On Thursday, 17 December 2015 at 22:28:25 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> On 12/17/15 4:17 PM, deadalnix wrote:
>>> But, to start, let's take action. Andrei, does dlang.org has any kind of
>>> analytic setup ?
>>
>> We use webalizer. -- Andrei
>
> I would suggest using something more powerful. Log analysis is one
> thing, but modern tools can do more.
>
> If you are not comfortable with sending data to google, I suggest using
> piwik : https://piwik.org/ . Some more setup, but you are 100% in
> control of the data.

I've used piwik, too. I think we're in good shape with analytics. Exploring alternative analytics engines would be a distraction. I just looked over the analytics and what we need now is good content and beautiful css. -- Andrei

On Thursday, 17 December 2015 at 20:08:32 UTC, Anon wrote:
> On Thursday, 17 December 2015 at 20:04:44 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
>> My feedback: add the ability to edit posts in the forum
>
> You can't edit email.

So your point is that the Dlang forum is implemented more like a mailing list than a forum? This means that your point is really that it would be a lot of work to implement this feature (perhaps even migrating to a different type of framework).

On Thursday, 17 December 2015 at 19:50:40 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> If you have some time and motivation to improve the documentation, there's tremendous opportunity for impact. So much low-hanging fruit, all well before we explore switching to a different way of building the site. And whatever improvements you make won't compete with future changes. There's so much opportunity there it hurts. -- Andrei

As long as the main page still works, then yeah, that's first priority.

Is there a particular spot that stands out as needing the most improvement? I'm no Phobos expert, but I can at least fill any glaring holes.

On 12/17/2015 06:33 PM, BLM768 wrote:
> On Thursday, 17 December 2015 at 19:50:40 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> If you have some time and motivation to improve the documentation,
>> there's tremendous opportunity for impact. So much low-hanging fruit,
>> all well before we explore switching to a different way of building
>> the site. And whatever improvements you make won't compete with future
>> changes. There's so much opportunity there it hurts. -- Andrei
>
> As long as the main page still works, then yeah, that's first priority.
>
> Is there a particular spot that stands out as needing the most
> improvement? I'm no Phobos expert, but I can at least fill any glaring
> holes.

There's a bunch to do.

* Many functions don't have "Parameters:", "Returns:", or "Throws:" sections. Those that respectively take parameters, return non-void, or throw, should have one each.

* All functions should have an example.

* "Examples:" is a historical error. All instances should be "Example:". Just one diff making that change throughout would be a meaningful contribution.

* Overloaded functions should be collected together, connected with "/// ditto".

* Examples on the site and on the library pages should be editable and runnable just like the one on the homepage.

* Eliminating those redundant macros that everybody's talking about.


Andrei

On Thursday, 17 December 2015 at 23:30:46 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
> On Thursday, 17 December 2015 at 20:08:32 UTC, Anon wrote:
>> On Thursday, 17 December 2015 at 20:04:44 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
>>> My feedback: add the ability to edit posts in the forum
>>
>> You can't edit email.

Maybe I can answer your questions:

> So your point is that the Dlang forum is implemented more like a mailing list than a forum?

Yes.

> This means that your point is really that it would be a lot of work to implement this feature (perhaps even migrating to a different type of framework).

I think shouldn't count on that.

JohnCK.

On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 11:30:46PM +0000, jmh530 via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Thursday, 17 December 2015 at 20:08:32 UTC, Anon wrote:
> >On Thursday, 17 December 2015 at 20:04:44 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
> >>My feedback: add the ability to edit posts in the forum
> >
> >You can't edit email.
> 
> So your point is that the Dlang forum is implemented more like a mailing list than a forum? This means that your point is really that it would be a lot of work to implement this feature (perhaps even migrating to a different type of framework).

Some of us (including myself) do not use the forum.dlang.org interface at all, but actually receive messages in email form. I prefer it that way because I find the online forum interface klunky and inefficient to use (though most would disagree), whereas in email form I can navigate and manage discussion threads with far greater efficiency. I would hate to have to actually start up a resource-hogging browser just to read forum posts.


T

-- 
Making non-nullable pointers is just plugging one hole in a cheese grater. -- Walter Bright

On Friday, 18 December 2015 at 00:43:11 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> ... I find the online forum interface klunky and inefficient to use (though most would disagree),

One thing that bothers me sometimes is the waste of space, as  you can see in this SS, there are 2 versions, the original with highlights and the other that I modified.

http://i.imgur.com/lx2qA7d.png

JohnCK.

On Thursday, 17 December 2015 at 23:50:34 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> * "Examples:" is a historical error. All instances should be "Example:". Just one diff making that change throughout would be a meaningful contribution.

Like so?

https://github.com/blm768/phobos/commit/5f08c058abd2bafe91056d5223d45ed5c07a748c

Sed for the win! (With manual review of the changes, of course.)

I'll open a pull request in a moment.

On 2015-12-18 00:50, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

> * Many functions don't have "Parameters:", "Returns:", or "Throws:"
> sections. Those that respectively take parameters, return non-void, or
> throw, should have one each.

I think we need to be better at enforcing this in the pull requests. I see a lot of this [2] in PR's.

> * All functions should have an example.
>
> * "Examples:" is a historical error. All instances should be "Example:".
> Just one diff making that change throughout would be a meaningful
> contribution.

The documentation for Ddco mentions "Examples:" [1]. Does it have a special meaning or is it just a convention?

[1] http://dlang.org/spec/ddoc.html
[2] https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/pull/3855#discussion_r46769338

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg