Re: Omit code output going forward

On 10/11/2025 19:57, Larry Garfield wrote:
> In a couple of issues now, we've run into an impass because it's unclear if we still need to include the output of code samples in manual pages.  There is the new in-page runner, which is guaranteed to give "correct" results (or error if it's showing a feature that is incompatible).
>
> I'd like to see us formally and explicitly decide on a policy here.
>
> And I will start by proposing that in most cases, we DO NOT need to include manually-created output, as the in-page runner is superior and takes less work for doc writers.  The only exception is where the runner doesn't support the code being shown for whatever reason.  (Like, it requires a file system, or some non-loaded extension, etc.)  In those cases, the traditional approach with a manual output block still makes sense.  But that's a minority case now.

My first thought on this was: what about offline docs? Chunked and 
single page HTML downloads on php.net, epub, (man pages still build when 
I tried recently, tho I haven't checked the content) (and pdf / chm if 
anyone gets them working again)

My follow-up thought was: Could PHD always generate the static version 
of the output and append it to the docs?
(I guess there'd be some attribute to attach to define whether or not 
output is generated, similar to the controls for WASM runnable examples)

(Might want to store the output in separate files so they can be cached 
to avoid running every single example every time the manual is built)

AllenJB