Python docs disappointing

r rt8396 at gmail.com
Sat Aug 1 02:00:28 CEST 2009


On Jul 31, 4:53 pm, Mark Lawrence <breamore... at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> r wrote:
> > On Jul 31, 4:16 pm, Carl Banks <pavlovevide... at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Jul 31, 1:10 pm, kj <no.em... at please.post> wrote:
>
> >>> I'm pretty new to Python, and I like a lot overall, but I find the
> >>> documentation for Python rather poor, overall.
> >>> I'm sure that Python experts don't have this problem: they have
> >>> internalized some good ways to access the documentation, are
> >>> productive with it, and therefore have lost the ability to see why
> >>> the Python documentations is deficient for beginners.
> >> That may be so, but I do remember when I was a beginner myself and I
> >> had no issue with the documentation.
>
> > have you tried the new docs (>= 2.6) The interface has changed
> > drastically as to render itself completely useless. The old docs (<=
> > 2.5) --the ones i learned from-- where flawless.
>
> > @ Mark Lawrence
> > Have you clicked any of those links? try the "Tutorial start here" and
> > then try to find a menu of sorts. It seems you have to click "next" to
> > navigate. Thats pretty counter intuitive if you need to get to page
> > 589!! Upon clicking the tutorial link in the OLD DOCS, you where
> > presented with a nice menu for concise navigation.
>
> Yes.  Works perfectly as evidenced by the fact that this evening I've
> checked data on the cProfile, pstats and array modules.
>
> --
> Kindest regards.
>
> Mark Lawrence.

Hold the phone... You checked data on modules using the "Tutorial
Start Here" link? Would not the "Global Module Index" be more, shall
we say, "informative"?



More information about the Python-list mailing list