Glenn Fowler writes: > > if you use the command line --man and --html options then > its already split w.r.t. option and operand documentation > ksh --man > wait --man > continue --man
Yes, this is good. And in the bash compatiblity code (src/cmd/ksh93/data/bash_pre_rc.sh), there is a "help" function for all builtins and "help wait" is just the info on "wait" which is equivalent to running "wait --man". But there are still large conceptual sections that aren't very well covered and I think this is what was aluded to. (By the way, it's not just Perl; zsh has several large sets of manual pages too not although nearly as many. Seriously, if you haven't tried it, type "man perl" to just see what's there.) The parts I'd like to see is more information on the type system with examples. I've sometimes look at the tests to help out here the focus here isn't on exposition. > > On Tue, 14 Oct 2008 18:22:15 -0400 (EDT) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Norman Ramsey) > wrote: > > The older I get the happier I am to be using ksh. > > But I do find I get increasingly impatient with the man page. > > ksh isn't just a shell any more; it's a full-blown programming > > language, and having all the documentation on one man page is a > > bit much. I am *not* advocating for a web page or an info document > > or for PDF; I love my command line and get annoyed when software > > doesn't have man pages. But I also think some attention to modular > > reasoning would pay dividends. Normally I have nothing good to say > > about perl, but it is a case where I think they have done a good job > > taking a large programming language and splitting its documentation > > over multiple man pages. > > > I am wondering how Dave and Glenn would feel about having ksh.1 split > > over multiple man pages and if there might be any readers of this list > > who would be interested in helping with such a job? > > > Norman _______________________________________________ ast-users mailing list [email protected] https://mailman.research.att.com/mailman/listinfo/ast-users
