Re: POD doesn't capture code semantics

On 5 Mar 2008, at 18:06, Ian Malpass wrote:

> Andy Armstrong wrote:
>
>>    =head2 C<foo>
>>    foo is a method...
>>    =head2 C<bar>
>> bar is a subroutine...
>> why not
>>    =method foo
>>    =sub bar
>
> How about:
>
>    =for method
>
>    =head2 C<foo>
>
> Bit ugly, but it should work. Additional stuff after "method" could  
> provide more metadata, etc.


Yeah, that could work. I wonder which is more likely to gain traction:

* backwards compatible / slightly verbose
* incompatible / concise

I suppose either would be adopted if there were tools that made good  
use of it. And the backwards compatible approach clearly has the  
advantage of backwards compatibility :)

Life would be so much easier if there weren't 1,000,001 ad-hoc POD  
parsers out there.

-- 
Andy Armstrong, Hexten