On Friday, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote: > On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 8:46 AM, Eli Barzilay <e...@barzilay.org> wrote: > > > > It's probably good to make this an important goal when learning > > the system, even though it's a small corner of the whole thing > > now... > > I think Eli means "the documentation system" by "the whole thing",
Yes. > but the equivalence between at-exps and s-exps is at the heart of > why at-exps are great, and why Eli's design succeeded where many > many other people have failed in this space. If you're learning > about at-exps, keeping this equivalence in mind is very useful. Yes, that was supposed to be my point... Two days ago, Laurent wrote: > > My 2 cents: I think what is missing is a complete example as a > tutorial, like "You've written a module? Here is what to do, step by > step, to document it and make it a package. Here is the example > module file, here is the corresponding scribble file (with defproc, > defform, defstruct(*), itemlist, tabular, racket, racketblock, > image, sections, title, emph and bold, and all most used forms), and > here is the result on-screen." Then people don't need initially to > fully grok the at-exp syntax or other difficult parts, they can just > copy/paste from the example when it's not yet clear to them. +1; especially in a context of a programmable language where such things often tempt you to write macros for doing things, which makes template examples a little more rare... -- ((lambda (x) (x x)) (lambda (x) (x x))) Eli Barzilay: http://barzilay.org/ Maze is Life! ____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users