2011/2/20 Gregory Pittman <gpitt...@iglou.com> > One hopes that it can progress in tandem with the code, by necessity a bit > behind cutting-edge features
Actually, shouldn't that be the way around? Documenting is thinking. We can look at this from two ends. Case #1 The program exists and it is (partially) or (not well) documented, hence the necessity to explain afterwards — and this comes naturally, yes, behind. Case #2 We can think of a more integrated way of doing things where any idea or feature or enhancement that makes it into the application is first well-thought of, defined, described, thus truly documented before it is actually coded. > , and like code should have a modular structure, ideally documentation > should have a structure that allows for easy multipurposing and reuse of > materials. There is obviously no need to rewrite everything when a new version of the application is released. And if there is, then this means that it is not an update but a rewrite of the application or a total change in the way it behaves. > I don't think we are there yet, but I would like to see us move in that > direction. Already we have been a more active participant in documentation > updates and "bugfixes" coming with svn code updates and bugfixes > Which is good and which also proves the “doc first code next” approach to be efficient. Louis > > Greg. > > _______________________________________________ > CREATE mailing list > CREATE@lists.freedesktop.org > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/create >
_______________________________________________ CREATE mailing list CREATE@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/create
