We currently have two differently generated versions of the library documentation on dlang.org:

1) dlang.org/phobos/* (and dlang.org/phobos-prerelease/*) is generated by dmd's Ddoc functionality. These are the official docs, part of the "Documentation" section.

2) dlang.org/library/* (and dlang.org/library-prerelease/*) is generated by ddox (<https://github.com/rejectedsoftware/ddox>). Once upon a time, these docs were supposed to become official, replacing the other ones. Currently, they're in an unfortunate state of beta-forever.

ddox has a number of issues that make it currently not feasible to just switch over:

* Macro for "path to base of docs"?
    https://github.com/rejectedsoftware/ddox/issues/87

* macros from parent scopes are not known in child scopes
    https://github.com/rejectedsoftware/ddox/issues/116

* treating of underscore not consistent with dmd
    https://github.com/rejectedsoftware/ddox/issues/117

There may be more.

Now, is the plan still to make the switch to ddox for the official documentation? Is anyone actually working towards that goal?

If not, maybe we should get rid of the ddox pages, at least for the time being. Currently, I think they do more harm than good: They confuse people who find them through google, and they drain maintenance resources.

Regarding google, hiding them via robots.txt could be a milder alternative to outright deleting them.

And then there's Adam D. Ruppe's <http://dpldocs.info/>. No idea how that plays into the whole mess we're in.

On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 06:19:45PM +0100, anonymous via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> And then there's Adam D. Ruppe's <http://dpldocs.info/>. No idea how that plays into the whole mess we're in.

It is separate exactly to avoid the trouble of the official site.

I certainly wouldn't mind if we were to switch over, but I'm not quite ready for that yet, I am still doing a lot of changes on my site.

The irony of a thread about "getting [...] out of limbo" apparently being in limbo is amusing to me.

Am 12.02.2016 um 18:19 schrieb anonymous:
> ddox has a number of issues that make it currently not feasible to just
> switch over:
>
> * Macro for "path to base of docs"?
>      https://github.com/rejectedsoftware/ddox/issues/87

I'm a little worried about introducing such special behavior, because it could lead to doc comments that are incompatible with vanilla Ddoc.
>
> * macros from parent scopes are not known in child scopes
>      https://github.com/rejectedsoftware/ddox/issues/116
>
> * treating of underscore not consistent with dmd
>      https://github.com/rejectedsoftware/ddox/issues/117

Both fixed now.