Tim Peters wrote:
> > (Or are the two goals -- completeness and readability --
> > incompossible, unable to be met at the same time by one document?)
>
> No, but it's not easy, and it's not necessarily succinct. For an
> existence proof, see Guy Steele's "Common Lisp the Language". I
> don't th
[A.M. Kuchling]
> ...
> (Or are the two goals -- completeness and readability --
> incompossible, unable to be met at the same time by one document?)
No, but it's not easy, and it's not necessarily succinct. For an
existence proof, see Guy Steele's "Common Lisp the Language". I
don't think it's
Guido van Rossum wrote:
> Agreed. Is it too late to also attempt to bring Doc/ref/*.tex
> completely up to date and remove confusing language from it? Ideally
> that's the authoritative Language Reference -- admittedly it's been
> horribly out of date but needn't stay so forever.
it's perfectly p
A.M. Kuchling wrote:
> I find this work very exciting. Time hasn't been kind to the
> reference guide -- as language features were added to 2.x, not
> everything has been applied to the RefGuide, and users will probably
> have been forced to read a mixture of the RefGuide and various PEPs.
or as
Guido van Rossum wrote:
> Agreed. Is it too late to also attempt to bring Doc/ref/*.tex
> completely up to date and remove confusing language from it? Ideally
> that's the authoritative Language Reference -- admittedly it's been
> horribly out of date but needn't stay so forever.
It's never too la
A.M. Kuchling wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 29, 2006 at 08:54:00PM +0200, Fredrik Lundh wrote:
>
>> http://pyref.infogami.com/
>>
>
> I find this work very exciting. Time hasn't been kind to the
> reference guide -- as language features were added to 2.x, not
> everything has been applied to th
At 11:37 AM 5/1/2006 -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>Agreed. Is it too late to also attempt to bring Doc/ref/*.tex
>completely up to date and remove confusing language from it? Ideally
>that's the authoritative Language Reference -- admittedly it's been
>horribly out of date but needn't stay so for
Agreed. Is it too late to also attempt to bring Doc/ref/*.tex
completely up to date and remove confusing language from it? Ideally
that's the authoritative Language Reference -- admittedly it's been
horribly out of date but needn't stay so forever.
--Guido
On 5/1/06, A.M. Kuchling <[EMAIL PROTECT
On Sat, Apr 29, 2006 at 08:54:00PM +0200, Fredrik Lundh wrote:
> http://pyref.infogami.com/
I find this work very exciting. Time hasn't been kind to the
reference guide -- as language features were added to 2.x, not
everything has been applied to the RefGuide, and users will probably
have bee
the pytut wiki (http://pytut.infogami.com/) has now been up and
running for one month, and has seen well over 250 edits from over
a dozen contributors.
to celebrate this, and to exercise the toolchain that I've deve-
loped for pytut and pyfaq (http://pyfaq.infogami.com/), I spent
a few hours putti
10 matches
Mail list logo
