Automated Documentation of CLI Programs

[SamuelSchlesinger]

It would be great to have better automated documentation, though it is very low priority for me, as I don't find myself needing anything more than what I have now.

[SamuelSchlesinger]

#4 was a step forward

[SamuelSchlesinger]

#4 may have been worse for docs, actually, in the sense that it added a feature that I am unsure of the value of. Having the Haskell types is cool for a Haskeller, but it is totally useless otherwise.

[SamuelSchlesinger]

I think #4 was a lot better actually, though perhaps there will be some fun newtype games to play with big programs. More generally, the current implementation of things like arg sort of forbid me from representing the help text at the term level, and doing it at the type level comes with ergonomics costs of specifying the type of a command line interface in full.

[BebeSparkelSparkel]

Perhaps allowing a reader config on the printing format of the documentation could be helpful for allowing different formatting.

[SamuelSchlesinger]

That would be excellent. I would review pull requests for this.