On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 6:28 PM, John Lato <jwl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > From: Stephen Tetley <stephen.tet...@gmail.com> > > > > Hello all > > > > While new libraries develop at pace, their documentation rarely does; > > so I'd have to disagree with John's claim that re-naming libraries > > makes development by new users harder. I'd argue that having tutorials > > not work for later revisions is more confusing than having various > > packages doing the same thing. I'd also contend that beginners are > > better off lagging behind the cutting edge and using Parsec 2, > > QuickCheck 1, Haskore-vintage, as the earlier version all have > > comprehensive documentation - Parsec 2 and Haskore have extensive > > manual/tutorials, QuickCheck 1 was small enough that the original > > QuickCheck paper covered its use. > > Lagging behind the cutting edge is one thing, but learning > possibly-deprecated or soon-to-be-obsolete interfaces is another. I > would contend that in each case the intention is for the earlier > version to be superseded because of significant (hopefully > user-driven) benefits provided by the new design. Now beginners are > in the very frustrating situation of having invested time with a > codebase that they learn is obsolete. Depending on the significance > of the changes, some amount of that knowledge can be carried forward, > but it's a disheartening position to be in and I would expect a few > could give up entirely at that point. I think that's worse than > floundering around with no documentation at all. > > Of course a better solution is for maintainers to update their manuals! >
Or write translator tools for upgrading to the new API :) Pipe dream? Maybe. Jason
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
