I'm working on extracting a machine usable grammar from the D documentation. At this point I have a sed script that works for the most part. However in doing this I have run across a number of minor errors in the documentation. Things like inconsistent formatting, non-terminals being spelled differently in different places and two non-terminals having the same name. I have been fixing these in my local copy of the ddoc source and am wondering if I could get the fixes pushed back into the dsource repository? I also have a small number of others changes (for example there is a cases where the binding of an optional attribute is ill defined from a machine's point of view) but these should be review before they go in.

So, Walter, am I likely to see these changes added? What should I do to help get them added?

== Quote from BCS (BCS@pathlink.com)'s article
> I'm working on extracting a machine usable grammar from the D documentation. At this point I have a sed script that works for the most part. However in doing this I have run across a number of minor errors in the documentation. Things like inconsistent formatting, non-terminals being spelled differently in different places and two non-terminals having the same name. I have been fixing these in my local copy of the ddoc source and am wondering if I could get the fixes pushed back into the dsource repository? I also have a small number of others changes (for example there is a cases where the binding of an optional attribute is ill defined from a machine's point of view) but these should be review before they go in.
>
> So, Walter, am I likely to see these changes added? What should I do to help get them added?

I'd like to think that creating a new issue in the issue tracking system would work, but grammar-related issues don't seem to get much of a response from Walter:

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1351 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1466 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1905 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=949

Maybe he'd respond if a patch were offered? I don't know.

jcc7 wrote:
> == Quote from BCS (BCS@pathlink.com)'s article
> 
>>I'm working on extracting a machine usable grammar from the D
>>documentation. At this point I have a sed script that works for the
>>most part. However in doing this I have run across a number of minor
>>errors in the documentation. Things like inconsistent formatting,
>>non-terminals being spelled differently in different places and two
>>non-terminals having the same name. I have been fixing these in my
>>local copy of the ddoc source and am wondering if I could get the
>>fixes pushed back into the dsource repository? I also have a small
>>number of others changes (for example there is a cases where the
>>binding of an optional attribute is ill defined from a machine's
>>point of view) but these should be review before they go in.
>>
>>So, Walter, am I likely to see these changes added? What should I do
>>to help get them added?
> 
> 
> I'd like to think that creating a new issue in the issue tracking system would
> work, but grammar-related issues don't seem to get much of a response from Walter:
> 
> http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1351
> http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1466
> http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1905
> http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=949
> 
> Maybe he'd respond if a patch were offered? I don't know.

done that, no reply

BCS wrote:
> So, Walter, am I likely to see these changes added? What should I do to help get them added?

Email me diffs, please!

Walter Bright wrote:
> 
> Email

ok