> On 09 May 2016, at 09:37, Peter Uhnák <[email protected]> wrote: > > How about WebDoc (or similar) serving up the API with class comments to > make it searchable on the web > > Although the in-image help is really bad, I would argue that for the API > itself it's quite the opposite. > Pharo is centered around code, so there is a lot of different and amazing > ways to search the API and easily find what you are looking for (including > trivially scripted searching). > I don't think that any web interface can compete with that (unless it's > powered by Pharo itself). > > In fact there used to be WebDoc for Pharo API, however as there are no > comments and examples it wasn't useful at all. You can do better search and > actually try the code directly in the image, or search for examples.
See http://files.pharo.org/doc/ for WebDoc. I do totally agree with the fact that Pharo is first and foremost an in-image IDE, we should concentrate on that. The web based documentation is mostly relevant for search indexing and newcomers. > The wiki would also act as a place where the documentation can evolve > until it is considered stable enough to include in the image. > > For this we have books imho. Simple documentation should be added to image. > > also have links to other blogs, etc. that may not be appropriate for > in-image documentation > > I don't see why not, but it would be better to just copy the content without > having to click (depends on the content).
