<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 3:32 AM, Gour <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:gour@gour-nitai.com">gour@gour-nitai.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
On Fri, 9 Apr 2010 08:36:51 +0200<br>
>>>>>> "Simon" == Simon Hengel wrote:<br>
<br>
Simon> My feeling is that we lack mostly short, tutorial-style<br>
Simon> introductions, that just get you started with a topic/library.<br>
<br>
I agree.<br>
<br>
Moreover, practically every 'framework' (except Happs) is more or less<br>
one-man show band, i.e. it works for their authors without docs, but<br>
that's not the way one can build community around it...And without<br>
some 'critical' mass of users, one is reluctant to invest time/energy<br>
into such products...Kind a catch-22. :-(<br>
<br>
<br></blockquote><div>I can't speak for others, but I personally don't have a problem investing in documentation on my one-man-show libraries. In the specific case of Yesod, I *know* it's going to have some major changes in the next release, so it's not worth it right now.</div>
<div><br></div><div>In general, I think the problem for library writers is that- since *we* wrote the code- we don't know what's confusing about it. As far as we're concerned, our code is beautiful, elegant, simple and self-documenting (until we look at it again six months later). We really need an outside voice to tell us what's lacking.</div>
<div><br></div><div>So instead of saying "fizzbuzz has no documentation," maybe say "I saw the fizzbuzz tutorial on creating foobars, but I couldn't figure out how to extend that for wibbles. Could you write a tutorial for that?"</div>
<div><br></div><div>Michael</div></div>