On Apr 24, 2007, at 6:35 AM, Antoon Pardon wrote: > On 2007-04-24, Michael Bentley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> On Apr 24, 2007, at 4:47 AM, Antoon Pardon wrote: >> >>> On 2007-04-24, Michael Bentley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Apr 24, 2007, at 1:39 AM, Antoon Pardon wrote: >>>> >>>>> I suspect that if you give this explanation to someone and explain >>>>> that there is also a step parameter, chances are he will answer >>>>> correctly if you ask him, what he thinks the following will result >>>>> in: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> "This is an example line"[12:19:2] >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> If you ask him what the following will result in: >>>>> >>>>> "This is an example line"[19:12:-1] >>>>> >>>>> Chances are he will give the wrong answer. >>>> >>>> To be honest, bro -- I'd expect him to have enough intelligence to >>>> experiment for a second and figure it out. This isn't rocket >>>> science >>>> -- you can plainly see what's happening -- so learn it and move >>>> on. >>> >>> I don't think that the possibility to experiment and see for oneself >>> is a good reason to keep a possible confusing explanation in a >>> tutorial. >> >> It's only potentially confusing if you already know more than has >> been presented and are in fact, *experimenting* with techniques that >> have yet to be presented. > > People don't read tutorials in a strictly linear fashion. They can > continue to later subjects and then come back here to see how things > tie together. So the fact that it is only confusing to those who > know more than is already presented doesn't seem a very good reason > to leave it in.
Yet they understand that earlier in the document, there is likely to be a less complete coverage of a given topic. There is in fact, a link on that page that includes a more complete coverage of that topic (which I mentioned to you in an earlier message IIRC). > >>>> Or better yet, quietly submit a patch... >>> >>> Why should I? If the reactions would have been one of agreement that >>> this is confusing and that the explanation should be changed, I >>> would >>> have considered submitting a patch. >>> >>> But most people that reacted seem to defend the current text in some >>> way or another. So if most people seem to feel there is no need for >>> a change why should I then submit a patch? >> >> ... or even continue the thread? > > It is always interresting to see how far people are willing to go to > defend the status quo. > > I bet that if the tutorial was written now, given the possible > confusion, nobody would defend including this section. But now > that it already is in the tutorial it suddenly is worth defending. Submit a patch if you want it changed. I'm sure your valuable insights will greatly improve the quality of the python documentation. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
