I agree with Brad here. I tend to get a better understanding of a topic when I can get a quick "down 'n dirty" overview of a topic that gets me up and running as quickly as possible. Doing so, I get to play around with the technology a bit and get a feel for how it works before I dig further into the the "nitty gritty". This way when I choose to learn the low-level details of a technology, I'll already have a good general understanding of the technology and I'll be able to get a much better understanding of the overall technology. I.e., when I want to learn a new topic, I want to start slowly rather than drink from a firehose.
Christopher On 1/11/06, Brad Beveridge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 1/8/06, Robert Strandh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Cody Koeninger writes: > > > http://wiki.alu.org/Gardeners_Documentation > > > > Personally, I think the 10 minute restriction is silly, and reflects > > the short attention span of the MTV-generation, which is probably > > partly responsible for the relatively low popularity of Common Lisp > > itself. > > IMHO, the 10 minute rule of thumb is a good one. There is no reason > why there can't be far more detailed and correct documentation also, > but if I want (to avoid inventing an example :) a regex library, then > I want to be able to use the basics quickly. Obviously, not every > library will work with just 10 minutes effort, but the more that do > the better. > > Cheers > Brad > _______________________________________________ > Gardeners mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.lispniks.com/mailman/listinfo/gardeners > -- Christopher Roach [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ Gardeners mailing list [email protected] http://www.lispniks.com/mailman/listinfo/gardeners
