help-gnu-emacs
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Program structure of Pstricks, what is its basic structure?


From: Crashedandburnt
Subject: Re: Program structure of Pstricks, what is its basic structure?
Date: 24 Feb 2004 00:51:13 -0800

David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote in message news:<address@hidden>...
> address@hidden (Crashedandburnt) writes:
> 
> >     effort. I help anonymously. We all know that there are numerous
> >     unsung heros of free software movement. Certainly, it is
> >     impossible to refer to them individually and it is easiest to
> >     give credit to them collectively by naming Stallman. But to ask
> >     me to write the doc by figuring it out is plain mischief.
> 
> Even Stallman himself would call this nonsense you write preposterous.
                                   ^^^^
what nonsense? If you quote rather than using pronouns, you would be
better understood.

> He is not out for recognition of himself, but for the GNU project.
> And not for some general goodness or whatever, but for recognition
> where it actually employed, namely in GNU/Linux systems.

What did I say that is in contradiction to your above para beginning,
"He is ...." Don't put words in my mouth, please.

> And how do you think documentation comes into being?  By writing
> itself magically?

The easiest way is for the author or those who understand it well to 
document it at the peak of their understanding.

> > I recall, you said in the conversation that you spent "just too much
> > time" on it.
>
> If any such communication has happened (which I consider quite
> unlikely), this is and remains a valid reply.  You are entitled to
> what you bargained for, and for nothing else.
> 
> > But the point is that when one spends so much time on writing a
> > package, refining it and then writing about 76 page pairs of user
> > manual, it is not much effort to document the workings of the
> > package for others to learn and benefit from, since it was put in
> > the public domain.
> 
> Good, then write a pstricks replacement, 76 page pairs of user manual
> and document the workings of the package for others to learn and
> benefit from.  Blessings, honour and power be unto you.
> 
> Until then, shut up.

Mr. Kastrup:
I am a free man and cannot give up my right to speak. I do not tell
you to shut up. You are free to present your case, and I mine.

Answer this: How many visitors, or posters on ctt or clp do you think
will understand the code when they ask such basic questions daily that
you have to explain, even though they are all explained in Knuth's
book or code?

I think, I have a valid point. The documentation needs to be improved.

It is incomprehensible to the majority. And since you are one of those
who
explains tex, most posters will not come out to dispute with you, but
they secretly agree with me that documentation is not good enough.
That is why I argue that if the regular stream of posting consists of
simple questions, it is impossible that they would understand this
code in a reasonable time.

I might give an analogy. It is a class in which few students
understand
the prof. The rest are afraid of criticising. Most don't know if it
is their fault, or that of prof.

In the coming days, the ability of people to explain the subject
of this thread will itself testify how well it is documented.

In the coming days, the ability of people to explain the subject
of this thread will itself testify how well it is documented.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]