Michael Lazzaro wrote:
"Joseph F. Ryan" wrote:I think the biggest concern should be converts from perl 5. Most people will
Angel Faus wrote:
I think that the best way would be to create an schema of a language manual,
and fill the documents as we proceed reviewing the Apocalypses.
Agreed -- we should certainly figure out the overall structure first,
before doing much else. I think that's a pretty good start for an
outline, too.
Now given our intended goal of it being detailed enough for internals,
but written even for beginners, how do we "package" the materials? (Should it be a concise language reference, a series of tutorials, a
formal or informal booklike document that explains everything in detail?
I know, I know, everyone's going to say "yes, all of them, and it
should dispense softdrinks from your CD-ROM drive upon request...")
have an attitude similar to: "I know how to do X in perl5, now how do I do
that in perl6?" I think that a set of tutorials (that refer to the main docs
many, many times) that show how to translate common idioms, structures, and
techniques from perl 5 to perl 6, such that if a person reads through them,
they'll at least have enough knowledge on perl6 to begin to write in it, and
know where to turn to when they have problems.
<snip>
I think that most people first go to a "support place", i.e. PerlMonks, Perlguru, #perl, c.l.p.m, etc., whereAfter users gain some experience, the role of the online/manpage documentation shifts to one of "support". People will go to the docs if any of these is true:-- they have a very specific question -- they have a very advanced question -- they have a question their book(s) don't answer -- they don't know enough about their question to know where to look for it in the book.
the people there will refer them to the correct docs.
Joseph F. Ryan
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
