Benno wrote: > On Thu Sep 14, 2006 at 14:03:29 +1000, Michael Lake wrote: [...] > > >3. The python documentation can be described as 'terse' at best. It's got a > >long way to go to get to the level of usefulness as perldoc docs. I often > >get tracebacks and errors when calling up documentation. > > This really suprises me, I've found the python docs, at least for the > core modules, pretty good -- I usually use the web docs, rather than > the builtin via help() docs (which is odd, considering I use and > expect man pages for C libraries, I guess in 1.5.2 help() didn't > exist, so my brain expects the website formatted help...), although I > think they come from the same source. Various packages around the > place are definately not so good though.
The pydoc docs (what you get from help()) is built from the docstrings in the source code, but the HTML docs are built from seperately maintained documentation (in LaTeX format). The HTML docs are usually more in-depth and likely to provide overviews, and I wouldn't describe them as terse, and I usually use them as my primary reference rather than what pydoc generates. -Andrew. _______________________________________________ coders mailing list coders@slug.org.au http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/coders
