Am Dienstag, den 13.12.2011, 21:22 +0100 schrieb oliver: > Hello, > > > I again want to mention R. > > The installation procdure for users is very easy. > What I also like there, is that the documentation > includes references to books, which explain the algorithms > or other background information. > Maybe thats too much of what is needed for OCaml. > > But it's what I do like there. > > Also R-packages necessarily need to be documented, > have a manpage / package description. > > Not sure if this is necessary with OCaml stuff, > because *.mli files are there, and ocamlc -i could > print the interfaces of the modules, if nothing else is there > to rely on. > But maybe these kinds of minimalistic documentation-generation > could be created automatically by the installing tools. > > Nicely printed html-docs for interfaces are very helpful. > > And also nice would be, to have such nicely printed documentation > also available at the server, even before downloading any packages. > So, browsing a package documentation online could be done > before downloading the package.
docs.camlcity.org Gerd > > The type system and module system would make it su much superior > to languages like Perl, Python or others. > > It's always a fun to read the interface docs at the OCaml manual, > or that are provided by other OCaml-projects online, compared to > what any other language offers. > > But for some very big libraries a meta_documentation, > something like a mini-tuorial, an overview on how to > easily jump into the usage of big library would make sense to. > > Something like a hierarchical view of how the modules can be used, > because some modules may provide types that are used by other modules. > If it's displayed hierarchically and graphgically, it could save much time > looking at all kinds of modules, which maybe will never be needed. > > Of course I also think that there should be some docs that explain in some > words, > what the module and it's function do. > When exploring ocamlgraph some weeks ago, I saw a interface doc, > but it was not obvious what kind of functionality each function offers, > or how to find a function that offered, what I was looking for. > > Via #ocaml I could get hints to the functions I needed, and it then worked > out of the box. But I would not have found it by myself. > So, maybe even some kind of keyword tagging to a provided function > would be fine. > > > Also what I like in the R community, is that there is a journal, > that offers articles on R, but also on statistics. > I know, there are a lot of blogs around OCaml, some company-driven, > some private. > > But the R journal for R is really something that is an eye-catcher. > Downloadable as pdf. So if I want to have it on paper, I can have > high quality doc. > > Current issue of R-journal: > > http://journal.r-project.org/current.html > > There also is the R-Meta-Blogger-Site R-Bloggers: > > http://www.r-bloggers.com/ > > Of course R has a much much bigger community than OCaml. > > But I think, just bringing in some more ideas could make sense here. > > If this makes sense to OCaml / OCaml community or not, > I don't know. But at least I think the R-community is > somehow inspiring. > > Just my 3.3 KiB > > Ciao, > Oliver > -- Caml-list mailing list. Subscription management and archives: https://sympa-roc.inria.fr/wws/info/caml-list Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs
