Python docs disappointing
torriem at gmail.com
Thu Nov 20 17:51:47 CET 2014
On 11/20/2014 08:54 AM, jstnms123 at gmail.com wrote:
> Perhaps the reason programs are so inelegant, and so user-UNfriendly,
> and so bug-infested, is a natural consequence, when a field is
> dominated by creatures who know much more than they comprehend, and
> much less than they need to? If, I think, you cannot explain a thing
> to me, you do not understand it. After all, I'm a lot smarter than
> you, and I have thankfully learned make out a fool however obscurely
> he covers himself.
I'm not really sure what your point is, who are you are talking to, or
the purpose in replying to your own post from 5 years ago! You seem to
be addressing "you" but I don't know who that is.
Kudos for apparently sticking with Python despite your struggles with
Personally I find the online docs to be *very* good, comparable to the
best of documentation for programming languages anywhere. For example,
Python's official docs have either improved since your last look in
2009, or maybe you didn't know to look there:
The "data" parameter that confused you so much in 2009 is explained very
clearly. But if it's not clear enough, try it out and see what it does.
Python is a very discoverable language. Just fire up the interpreter and
try out code, and interrogate the returned objects (dir, help, etc).
Between the python docs and loads of helpful folk on this list and on
the web in general, I can do a google search on just about any
python-related coding question and find loads ("heaps" for Chris!) of
helpful information including complete examples, which I find very
helpful. I'm sure google was around in 2009 when you last posted.
Surely you could have googled for python urllib example and found one.
For all your talk of communication and many words, you're saying very
little, I'm not at all sure what you are talking and to whom your
audience is. Since you're apparently not explaining this does that mean
you don't understand it? Methinks you are misrepresenting the adage
about being able to explain something is to understand it. If an
engineer explains dynamic force analysis to you but you don't
understand, does that mean he really doesn't understand it? Of course
not. He just lacks the ability to explain it in terms of reference you
will understand, or maybe you lack prerequisite knowledge. Study
engineering for a while and you'll understand him well enough.
If you're just trolling, hopefully the list will forgive me.
More information about the Python-list