Python docs disappointing

Grant Edwards invalid at invalid.invalid
Fri Nov 21 00:10:23 CET 2014

On 2014-11-20, jstnms123 at <jstnms123 at> wrote:

> I write this to address the criticism which targets a user's lack of
> responsibility for the real/implied/insinuated failings of the docs. 
> As a relatively inexperienced student of programming, I am not in any
> position to contribute/edit the documents.

Wrong.  As an inexperienced user, you are _exactly_ the right person
to contribute/edit the documents.  A documents _always_ make sense to
the author and to somebody who already knows the information.  They
are often not capable of seeing what's wrong.

It's those who are _not_ familiar with the subject matter who can
often make the most valuable contributions.

> DOCUMENTATION: .  Not only are the semantics of the editors in
> question, but so are the syntactical and grammatical conventions,
> too.

Then send in suggestions, corrections and improvements.  Or pony up
and actually take over maintenance of one of the documents you think
is so bad.

The authors of the documentation aren't _intentionally_ writing things
that other people don't understand.  If you don't understand the
documentation or think it needs to be extended/expanded, then help
_do_ it.

Just telling somebody "the document you wrote SUCKS!" is not even a
_tiny_ bit helpful.

Grant Edwards               grant.b.edwards        Yow! Everybody gets free
                                  at               BORSCHT!

More information about the Python-list mailing list