in reply to Re^6: Meta-perl - sorting my perl subs with perl?
in thread Meta-perl - sorting my perl subs with perl?

Who is "the programmer" here? The person maintaining the function? Or the person using the function?

Two different people. Two different sets of documentation. If it's only available using a specific editor, both people lose.

  • Comment on Re^7: Meta-perl - sorting my perl subs with perl?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^8: Meta-perl - sorting my perl subs with perl?
by educated_foo (Vicar) on Jan 24, 2012 at 16:46 UTC
    Who is "the programmer" here? The person maintaining the function? Or the person using the function?
    Obviously, the programmer is the person editing the function.
    Two different people. Two different sets of documentation. If it's only available using a specific editor, both people lose.
    If you're editing Emacs Lisp in something other than Emacs, you're an idiot.
[reply]
      Considering the site is about Perl, the thread mentions perl, and we're discussing where to place POD, where do you the impression from that we're talking about editing Emacs Lisp?

      I certainly am not.

[reply]
        What educated_foo is trying to explain is that the tight association between docstrings and functions facilitates writing/understanding code with such functions.

        And it's not limited to the emacs editor as you're trying to imply.

        I recently heard a long rant about how inferior the perldebugger is in comparison to a certain Python REPL, where imported methods are not only tab-expanded but also dynamically explained by help of the docstring.

        That's only possible because the documentation is part of the introspection.

        And nobody said that the higher level documentation shouldn't be done somewhere a big POD block or that deeper information to certain functions couldn't be located there.

        Cheers Rolf

[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom