Re: newbe: documentation string length
- From: verec <verec@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 16:33:20 +0000
On 2005-11-19 15:58:08 +0000, Harald Hanche-Olsen <hanche@xxxxxxxxxxxx> said:
+ verec <verec@xxxxxxx>:
| Let's face it: CL is a monster
I'll leave that particular bit of flame bait alone.
No flame intended. With about 1000 predefined "things", CL certainly doesn't qualify as a reading companion for my weekly 3 hours train journey back from London to Paris.
For good or bad, CL is *huge*. And it takes time, effort and dedication to make progress. Whether some elitists consider this "feature" as way to eliminate feable minds such as mine is entirely their calls.
| and the CLHS is THE example of how to write a user hostile | documentation.
The CLHS is just fine for what it is: A /reference/. It is not a tutorial, and was never intended as such.
Certainly, but ... this is a *poor* reference: let me document:
I was looking for the format special characters (the s, d, x and other stuff after the ~). Do you think there is a single place where the CLHS would document it? Nope! All scattered in various more or less logical places.
You go here first file:///Users/verec/Tools/LispWorks%20Personal%204.4.6/Library/lib/4-4-0-0/manual/online/web/CLHS/Body/f_format.htm
Find
nothing but a hint at "section 22.3" so you go there
file:///Users/verec/Tools/LispWorks%20Personal%204.4.6/Library/lib/4-4-0-0/manual/online/web/CLHS/Body/22_c.htm
Read
all of 22.3.1 to 22.3.12, and still can't find a single place where they're all listed. I just wanted a simple table!
talk of a _reference_ !
The intended audience for a reference is people who already have a pretty good idea how it all hangs together, but need a place to look up the specifics in all their horrific detail.
But even for people with actual working knowlege of the language, I find it extremely deceptive. Most links are just brain dead links. Sure they work, and are technically correct. They're just useless. (Kind of reminds me of an old joke ...)
(This hasn't stopped me from learning from the CLHS, but maybe I'm a computer language masochist. I never would have managed it without a good book like Graham's ANSI Common Lisp to get me started, though. Or at least, it would have taken me a lot longer.)
When the only thing you have is pretty bad, that's still the only thing you have!
I learnt _more_ in _less_ time by reading Siebel or Graham book, than by perusing the CLHS. YMMV of course.
| I'm learning Lisp, one ( at a time :-)
Fine, and good luck to you. When you feel like learning another tidbit, consider learning about read macros. You might wish to use them instead of #.(...) magic to format your doc strings.
That's a helpful hint. Many thanks.... Back to CLTL2, now, to read about "read macros" ... not the CHLS, unless I want, again, to get confused and come back empty handed :-(
-- JFB ()
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: newbe: documentation string length
- From: Lieven Marchand
- Re: newbe: documentation string length
- From: Wade Humeniuk
- Re: newbe: documentation string length
- From: Duane Rettig
- Re: newbe: documentation string length
- From: Pascal Bourguignon
- Re: newbe: documentation string length
- From: Harald Hanche-Olsen
- Re: newbe: documentation string length
- From: verec
- Re: newbe: documentation string length
- References:
- Re: newbe: documentation string length
- From: Harald Hanche-Olsen
- Re: newbe: documentation string length
- Prev by Date: Re: Opinions on intro lisp books
- Next by Date: Re: newbe: documentation string length
- Previous by thread: Re: newbe: documentation string length
- Next by thread: Re: newbe: documentation string length
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|