On Tuesday, April 29, 2014 11:01:46 PM UTC-5, Mars0i wrote: > > On Tuesday, April 29, 2014 10:47:58 PM UTC-5, da...@axiom-developer.orgwrote: >> >> Phil, >> >> > I like the general idea of the Valentin's proposal, but I don't >> > understand every bit of it. It sounds complicated. Personally, I'd >> > rather see something that's relatively simple, and good enough, than >> > something that's perfect but unwieldy. If it's too difficult, people >> > won't use it, or they'll waste time, or feel that the Clojure >> > community expects them to spend too much time on something that >> > detracts from what's important. >> >> Can I ask, quite seriously and not intending any sarcasm, what you mean >> by "detracts from what's important"? >> >> For me, "what's important" is to communicate ideas, designs, and details >> from one developer to another so that others can maintain, modify, and >> extend what exists. I've already held forth on what I think that implies >> so I won't bore you with it. >> >> What I don't understand is your criteria for "what's important" and >> how that translates to action. >> >> If we can agree on "what's important" then the technical details would >> have common criteria for "simple and good enough vs something that's >> perfect but unwieldy". >> >> Tim Daly >> > > We agree. >
Oh, sorry--you also asked what I meant by "detracts from" what's important. If a documentation formatting/organizing/coding system required learning a lot, figuring out a lot, adding information that is unlikely to be helpful, but could easily be replaced with something that's trivial to use, produce output that's less pretty, and that might require using a search function more often, but nevertheless helps to support good, thorough documentation (maybe terse sometimes, but still, it gives you what you need) that helps other developers (or oneself, later) to understand code whose meaning isn't obvious, then I'd favor the latter. Maybe no one is proposing what the former. I didn't understand the proposal, so I didn't know. (Aside about obviousness: My own standard for obviousness is more restrictive--i.e. fewer things are obvious--than some programmers, I think.) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
