On Nov 20, 2019, at 3:31 AM, Jack Firth wrote:
> Would it have helped if the get-directory documentation had included > examples? Many parts of Racket's documentation are lacking in example code, > especially the less-commonly-encountered parts. Indeed, I have previously mentioned the lack of examples as a general problem. However, many potential examples may already be written in the form of test code. There is a way to add a sandbox to Scribble which allows you to write test code and documentation at the same time. It would be great if this could be made easier to set up and then promoted for wider use. One place where it has been used is the struct++ package. See: https://docs.racket-lang.org/struct-plus-plus/index.html https://github.com/dstorrs/struct-plus-plus/blob/master/scribblings/struct-plus-plus.scrbl Also, as David Storrs has mentioned, it would be good if we can find a way to make it easier for more people to contribute to the documentation. See, for example, the thread "Wanted: Easier way to contribute docs" on this forum from June of 2017. If we can direct more of the energy of this community into, not just improving the documentation, but the way we do documentation, it would be a major improvement. Requiring lots of parentheses doesn't bother me. Lack of infix notation doesn't bother me. Lack of documentation does. James -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Racket Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to racket-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/racket-users/934E0BEE-5840-4596-975F-410C3770DBA6%40biomantica.com.
