ru...@yahoo.com writes:
> I took a look at the PHP docs last night which seem pretty well
> done. The User Comments looked rather as I expected, there was
> useful info but most did not contain documentation quality writing.
> So if they are used as a source for improving the docs, there
> clearly
On 18 Aug, 05:19, ru...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> Yes, I agree. I should have mentioned this as an exception
> in my "wikis suck" diatribe. Although it far better than
> most wiki's I've seen, it is still pretty easy to find signs
> of typical wiki-ness. On the Documentation page my first
> click was
On Mon, 17 Aug 2009 13:56:13 -0700, Paul Rubin wrote:
> Python 3.0 went overboard by actually removing the cmp argument and
> requiring use of the key argument. That requires various kludges if the
> key is, say, a tree structure that has to be recursively compared with
> another such structure.
Nathan Keel wrote:
idiot ... asshole
absolutely clueless ... idiot ...incredibly
arrogant, yet incredibly clueless.
To me, such name-calling is as obnoxious as the intended target.
tjr
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On 08/13/2009 08:46 AM, Paul Boddie wrote:
> On 13 Aug, 16:05, ru...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> All the above not withstanding, I too think a wiki is worth
>> trying. But without doing a lot more than just "setting up
>> a wiki", I sadly believe even a python.org supported wiki
>> is doomed to failure.
>
[Xah Lee]
> This part i don't particular agree:
>
> > * The reason for implementing the key= parameter had nothing to do
> > with limitations of Python's compiler. Â Instead, it was inspired by
> > the
> > decorate-sort-undecorate pattern.
>
> The decorate-sort-undecorate pattern is a compiler limi
Jon Harrop wrote:
> Xah Lee wrote:
>> On Aug 12, 12:15 pm, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
>>> * The reason for implementing the key= parameter had nothing to do
>>> with limitations of Python's compiler. Instead, it was inspired by
>>> the
>>> decorate-sort-undecorate pattern.
>>
>> The decorate-sort
Jon Harrop writes:
> You mean people use that pattern as a fast alternative in languages where
> user-defined functions are very slow, like Python and Mathematica?
It really doesn't matter whether the language is fast or slow--there
are going to be applications where calling the comparison functi
Jon Harrop wrote:
>Xah Lee wrote:
[...]
Please do not feed this well-known troll.
He is known to spew some remotely on-topic junk into a bunch of
unrelated NGs and to enjoy the ensuing confusion.
jue
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Xah Lee wrote:
> On Aug 12, 12:15 pm, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
>> * The reason for implementing the key= parameter had nothing to do
>> with limitations of Python's compiler. Instead, it was inspired by
>> the
>> decorate-sort-undecorate pattern.
>
> The decorate-sort-undecorate pattern is a com
On Aug 12, 12:15 pm, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
> [Xah Lee]
>
> > i've wrote several articles about this issue, total time spend on this
> > is probably more than 2 months full-time work. See:
>
> > ⢠Python Documentation Problems
> > http://xahlee.org/perl-python/python_doc_index.html
>
> I just
Thanks Raymond.
I've been out of python community for a couple of years. I've saved
your messages and will study it later when next time i work in python.
Possibly today and will reply in some of your points.
But just wanted to say thanks for improving python.
Also, sometimes ago out of the blue
A basic question in this thread is: Who will host the
doc-wiki/whatever and how will it be linked to?
If not hosted at python.org it can still be linked to from their
docs, if allowed, possibly with 3rd level domain and re-direct.
I host a number of commercial servers but I don't expect Guido to
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 20:23:27 -0700, rurpy wrote:
>> That's no different from *any* major refactoring. The exact same
>> problem exists for code as well as documentation. It's a solved problem
>> for code, and it's a solved problem for documentation.
>
> Huh? I don't buy this at all. Code refact
On 13 Aug, 16:05, ru...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> All the above not withstanding, I too think a wiki is worth
> trying. But without doing a lot more than just "setting up
> a wiki", I sadly believe even a python.org supported wiki
> is doomed to failure.
The ones on python.org seem to function reasona
On 08/12/2009 12:27 PM, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
> On Aug 12, 3:32 am, Paul Boddie wrote:
>> Maybe the problem is that although everyone welcomes contributions and
>> changes (or says that they do), the mechanisms remain largely beyond
>> criticism.
>
> FWIW, I support the idea the regular docs in
Paul Boddie wrote:
Right, but those good points are still worth taking on board. There
have been Xah Lee posts which have been relatively constructive,
The last time that he did do so that I read, I responded rationally like
I would with any other normal post. He responded with foul insults.
Raymond Hettinger wrote:
On Aug 12, 3:32 am, Paul Boddie wrote:
Maybe the problem is that although everyone welcomes contributions and
changes (or says that they do), the mechanisms remain largely beyond
criticism.
FWIW, I support the idea the regular docs incorporating links to
freely editab
On 08/12/2009 01:58 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Aug 2009 14:50:51 -0700, rurpy wrote:
>
The issue tracker is fine for many things, but the process it provides
is equivalent to peep-hole optimization. How does one submit a
tracker issue for something like the overall orga
> FWIW, I support the idea the regular docs incorporating links
> to freely editable wiki pages. That will at least make it
> easier for people to make changes or add notes.
>
> That being said, I would like to add a few thoughts about the
> current process. ISTM that important corrections (
[Raymond Hettinger]
> Here are a few thoughts on list.sort() for those who are interested:
After one more reading of Xah Lee's posts on the documentation for
sort,
here are couple more thoughts:
* The reason that list.sort() allows None for the cmp parameter is not
so that you can write list.sort
On Aug 12, 1:27 pm, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
(snip)
> * Many doc requests come from people just learning the language
> (that makes sense because the learning process involves reading
> the docs). Unfortunately, a fair number of those requests are
> flat-out wrong or represent a profound misunder
[Xah Lee]
> i've wrote several articles about this issue, total time spend on this
> is probably more than 2 months full-time work. See:
>
> ⢠Python Documentation Problems
> Â http://xahlee.org/perl-python/python_doc_index.html
I just read you post. You did devote a substantial amount of time
On Aug 12, 3:32 am, Paul Boddie wrote:
> Maybe the problem is that although everyone welcomes contributions and
> changes (or says that they do), the mechanisms remain largely beyond
> criticism.
FWIW, I support the idea the regular docs incorporating links to
freely editable wiki pages. That wi
Paul Boddie wrote:
On 12 Aug, 17:08, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
It's not the people who suggest improvements to the docs that are the
problem, but the ones who insist that the docs are terrible, but aren't
willing to do anything but complain. Oh, and trolls like ... I hesitate
to mention his name i
On 12 Aug, 17:08, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 06:24:18 -0700, Paul Boddie wrote:
>
> > What does the Python entry on Wikipedia have to do with editing the
> > Python documentation in a Wiki?
>
> Good question. I was responding to you mentioning Wikipedia as a possible
> role model
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 06:24:18 -0700, Paul Boddie wrote:
> On 12 Aug, 14:08, Steven D'Aprano cybersource.com.au> wrote:
>>
>> With tens of millions of web users, it's no surprise that Wikipedia can
>> attract thousands of editors. But this does not apply to Python, which
>> starts from a comparativ
Paul Boddie wrote:
[snip]
One can always spend one's time doing something which isn't 100%
enjoyable or 100% rewarding if one feels that the time is still being
spent on something worthwhile. I'm getting the feeling that lots of
Python-related stuff doesn't quite satisfy such criteria any more.
On 12 Aug, 14:08, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>
> With tens of millions of web users, it's no surprise that Wikipedia can
> attract thousands of editors. But this does not apply to Python, which
> starts from a comparatively tiny population, primarily those interested
> in Python. Have a look at the Wi
Paul Boddie boddie.org.uk> writes:
>
> A free-for-all isn't likely to be the best solution for more actively
> edited Python documentation, but Wiki solutions undeniably provide a
> superior "fast path" for edits by trusted users to be incorporated and
> published in accessible end-user documenta
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 03:32:08 -0700, Paul Boddie wrote:
> On 12 Aug, 09:58, Steven D'Aprano
> wrote:
>>
>> We know that there are problems. We've said repeatedly that corrections
>> and patches are welcome. We've repeatedly told you how to communicate
>> your answer to the question of what should
On 12 Aug, 09:58, Steven D'Aprano
wrote:
>
> We know that there are problems. We've said repeatedly that corrections
> and patches are welcome. We've repeatedly told you how to communicate
> your answer to the question of what should be done. None of this is good
> enough for you. I don't know wha
On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 10:45:51 +0200, Hendrik van Rooyen wrote:
> On Tuesday 11 August 2009 19:53:16 Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>
>> You want community input into the docs, but you're not willing to give
>> that input except to bitch and moan and sook that the tracker is no
>> good.
>
> wtf does the v
On Tuesday 11 August 2009 19:53:16 Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> You want community input into the docs, but you're not willing to give
> that input except to bitch and moan and sook that the tracker is no good.
wtf does the verb "sook" mean?
I find:
sook
ââ/sÊk/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [so
On Tue, 11 Aug 2009 14:50:51 -0700, rurpy wrote:
>>> The issue tracker is fine for many things, but the process it provides
>>> is equivalent to peep-hole optimization. How does one submit a
>>> tracker issue for something like the overall organization of the docs
>>> (for example, the mis-placem
ru...@yahoo.com wrote:
Such a reorg is not a simple matter
of moving a file from here to there. It will require a lot
moving about of sections and a lot of word-smithing to glue
them back together again in a coherent way.
Concerning this particular issue, not everyone would
agree that the doc
Carl Banks writes:
> On> For example, kj (who started this mess of thread) complained that
> pydoc didn't give exhaustive usage documentation. In contrast, I
> think pydoc gives too much information. I would rather have only the
> bare minimum; I don't want to pan through ten paragraphs just to
On Aug 11, 4:08 pm, Paul Boddie wrote:
> On 11 Aug, 23:50, ru...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > However, were the Python docs site to provide a wiki, along
> > with a mechanism to migrate suggestions developed on the wiki
> > into the docs, it might well be a viable (and easier because of
> > the wysiwyg ef
On 11 Aug, 11:37 pm, pavlovevide...@gmail.com wrote:
I will not take an opinion on whether Python's documentation is ideal
(more on why below) but I will opine that the conclusion doesn't
follow from your premise. People's expectations of what documentation
should be are too different, there wi
On Aug 11, 3:08 pm, Paul Boddie wrote:
> Certainly, the documentation situation with
> Python is not ideal; otherwise, people would not be complaining about
> it so frequently.
I will not take an opinion on whether Python's documentation is ideal
(more on why below) but I will opine that the conc
At 03:08 PM 8/11/2009, you wrote:
I recommend going to the existing Wiki and looking at what there is
already:
http://wiki.python.org/moin/Documentation
http://wiki.python.org/moin/CategoryDocumentation
I also can't see how to get
from http://wiki.python.org/moin/Documentation to
http://wik
On 11 Aug, 23:50, ru...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> However, were the Python docs site to provide a wiki, along
> with a mechanism to migrate suggestions developed on the wiki
> into the docs, it might well be a viable (and easier because of
> the wysiwyg effect) way of improving the docs. As other have
On 08/11/2009 11:53 AM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Aug 2009 07:57:28 -0700, rurpy wrote:
>
>> On 08/11/2009 01:47 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>>> r gmail.com> writes:
On Aug 9, 11:02 pm, David Lyon wrote:
> Since you're talking about documentation, which is a part of python,
>
Steven D'Aprano writes:
> - if people are keen on a Python wiki, then by all means publish one,
> just don't expect the Python dev team to build and manage it for you;
There are already some nice ones at:
http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Python
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-
On Tue, 11 Aug 2009 07:57:28 -0700, rurpy wrote:
> On 08/11/2009 01:47 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>> r gmail.com> writes:
>>> On Aug 9, 11:02 pm, David Lyon wrote:
Since you're talking about documentation, which is a part of python,
don't you think you should be discussing it on python
On 08/11/2009 01:47 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> r gmail.com> writes:
>> On Aug 9, 11:02 pm, David Lyon wrote:
>>> Since you're talking about documentation, which is a part of python,
>>> don't you think you should be discussing it on python-dev ?
>> Yea, them's be a friendly bunch to noob ideas
Antoine Pitrou wrote:
r gmail.com> writes:
On Aug 9, 11:02 pm, David Lyon wrote:
Since you're talking about documentation, which is a part of python,
don't you think you should be discussing it on python-dev ?
Yea, them's be a friendly bunch to noob ideas ;). Hey i got a better
idea, lets go
r gmail.com> writes:
>
> On Aug 9, 11:02 pm, David Lyon wrote:
> > Since you're talking about documentation, which is a part of python,
> > don't you think you should be discussing it on python-dev ?
>
> Yea, them's be a friendly bunch to noob ideas ;). Hey i got a better
> idea, lets go to the
On Aug 9, 11:02 pm, David Lyon wrote:
> Since you're talking about documentation, which is a part of python,
> don't you think you should be discussing it on python-dev ?
Yea, them's be a friendly bunch to noob ideas ;). Hey i got a better
idea, lets go to the IRS and see if we can persuade them
On Aug 9, 10:02 pm, David Lyon wrote:
...
> Before you do that, you should clearly work out in your own mind
> how you think things need to improve. It's not good enough just
> saying this or that is bad without having specific ideas on what
> needs to change.
'''
He did. Did you read, for examp
Since you're talking about documentation, which is a part of python,
don't you think you should be discussing it on python-dev ?
That's where discussions about the documentation should be held.
haha - I'm just curious to see how long it will for them to
shut the discussion down.
Before you do
The prob with python docs is with the python priests.
there are frequent posts about python doc's poor quality, and some
efforts to improve the doc (such as wiki or seggestions), about few
times a year (in so much as i've seen), the typical response is
pissing fight, with python priests to tell th
52 matches
Mail list logo
