Hi Todd,
I disagree with you. The P6 documentation can certainly be improved, but it
is quite good and clear already. Remember that it is technical
documentation, not a tutorial.
And the example you chose to give does not support your point: the P6
documentation for join is just at least as clear as the P5 documentation on
the same function.
When I wrote my book on Perl 6, there was no other P6 book around, so I had
to rely heavily on the existing documentation for all kinds of syntax
details, and I found that is was quite useful and even easy (and it has
improved quite a bit since then). You're welcome to help improving the
documentation, but, please, don't say it's bad just because you don't want
to make the effort needed to understand it.
If you don't understand the signatures in the documentation, you've
basically two possible solutions: just skip them, as you can certainly
understand how to use a built-in function without understanding the
signature (but it is still very useful to have the signature definition in
the documentation), or bite the bullet and learn how to read signatures.
Despite your denegation, I think that what you really need is to read a
good tutorial or book on Perl 6. If you had made a real effort to read such
introductory material, you would probably not have needed to ask about 90%
of the questions you asked lately. Do yourself a favor: read good
introductory material (tutorials or books).
HTH,
Laurent.
Le dim. 30 sept. 2018 à 11:32, ToddAndMargo <toddandma...@zoho.com> a
écrit :
> On 9/26/18 7:27 PM, Brandon Allbery wrote:
> > And again: this is only because you know perl 5. People are not born
> > knowing perl 5; to someone who doesn't know it, perldoc raises the same
> > kinds of questions you have been asking, and the answers have to be
> > found in perlsyn or perldata, etc. Which is exactly what you have been
> > complaining about with respect to perl 6 doing the same kind of thing.
>
> Geez Louise Bradley! The above is a really bad argument!
>
> "perldocs -f xxx" is a bazillion times easier to understand
> than Perl 6's manual, regardless if you know Perl 5 or not.
>
> And, by the way, I wonder just how may are coming to Perl 6
> without ANY Perl 5 experience?
>
> In every instance I can look up, perldocs puts Perl 6's
> documentation to shame.
>
> A simple comparison: which one leaves you knowing how to use
> the function and which one leaves you wondering "What the h***???"
>
> $ perldoc -f join
> join EXPR,LIST
> Joins the separate strings of LIST into a single string with
> fields separated by the value of EXPR, and returns that new
> string. Example:
>
> my $rec = join(':',
> $login,$passwd,$uid,$gid,$gcos,$home,$shell);
>
> Beware that unlike "split", "join" doesn't take a pattern
> as its first argument. Compare "split".
>
>
>
> https://docs.perl6.org/routine/join#(List)_routine_join
>
> (List) routine join
>
> Defined as:
>
> sub join($separator, *@list --> Str:D)
> method join(List:D: $separator --> Str:D)
>
> Treats the elements of the list as strings, interleaves
> them with $separator and concatenates everything into a
> single string.
>
> Example:
>
> join ', ', <a b c>; # RESULT: «a, b, c»
>
> Note that the method form does not flatten sublists:
>
> say (1, <a b c>).join('|'); # OUTPUT: «1|a b c»
>
>
> Oh and what the &*@% is a "*@list"? And why does the sub have one
> and the method does not? They are suppose to be identical.
>
> -T
>
