On Monday, 10 September 2018 at 00:56:37 UTC, void wrote:
On Sunday, 9 September 2018 at 06:32:39 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
On Saturday, September 8, 2018 8:36:26 PM MDT void via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Sunday, 9 September 2018 at 01:30:14 UTC, Neia Neutuladh
wrote:
> On Sunday, 9 September 2018 at 00:20:04 UTC, void wrote:
>> [...]
>
> https://code.dlang.org/packages/index.json
>
> https://code.dlang.org/api/packages/[package name]/info
Thanks.
I downloaded 100 packages from code.dlang.org and search for
"*doc*" and "*example*"
The results:
13 packages with "*doc*"
41 packages with "*example*"
55 packages with neither
8 packages with both
What would you expect that to tell you? ddoc doesn't require
any kind of doc folder (though some projects would have one
for custom ddoc files that then affect how the documentation
looks), and usually, the best way to handle examples is to use
ddoc-ed unittest blocks. So, while in some cases, it would be
appropriate to have some sort of additional documentation or
examples separate from the source code, in general, there
isn't much need for it. So, I don't know what information
anyone would expect to get from whether or not a project has
any folders with doc or example in their name.
- Jonathan M Davis
Script updated now searches for the string "unittest" on
package directory (*.d files only).
Result:
48 packages with "unittest"
That means there is ~= 50% chance an user should read the
library source in order to use it. To be fair I should manually
check if README.md is decent enough.
I'm sorry, but it's not even close to accurate, because some
libraries has documents on additional websites that has examples
and no examples directly in the source code using "standard
unittests" - This is true for most big libraries / frameworks.
You can't really measure such a thing accurately.
