FAQ Maintainers Mailing List
Re: What format?

---------

From: Tom Holub (doosh@best.com)
Date: Wed Aug 09 2000 - 12:03:27 CDT


On Tue, Aug 08, 2000 at 07:57:40PM +0200, Ralf Döblitz wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 08, 2000 at 08:30:35AM -0700, Tom Holub wrote:
> [...]
> > perl's own POD viewer doesn't even work half the time.
>
> ... when used inappropriately. It is originally meant to display
> complete POD files, not arbitrary chunks of a POD file.
>
> > clue [50] perldoc -f localtime
>
> And this cuts only the definiton of 'localtime' out of perlfunc and
> perldoc tries to display it (and does it IMHO quite well considering
> that the surrounding definitions etc. are missing).
>
> Try to display the complete POD with
> perldoc perlfunc
> and you will find that perldoc formats it very nicely:

"perldoc -f" is a documented switch for looking up "BuiltinFunction"s,
according to the man page. The man page does not say that perldoc
will mangle the formatting if you use it (though clearly it does that).
"perldoc perlfunc" is 7000 lines long and is not a reasonable alternative.

This is really all off-topic; I just don't see POD as a reasonable
base format, though its function in self-documenting scripts is kind
of neat.
 -Tom



[ FAQ Archive | Search FAQ Mail Archive | Authors | Usenet References ]
[ 1993 | 1994 | 1995 | 1996 | 1997 | 1998 | 1999 | 2000
]

---------

faq-admin@faqs.org

© Copyright The Internet FAQ Consortium, 1997-2000
All rights reserved