On November 10, 2014 3:09:48 PM EST, Niall Douglas wrote:
[snip dark commentary on programming]
I'm glad I've not had much experience in the programming world you describe our have been too dense to recognize it.
For me, finding a library that solves my problems is valuable. Documentation is a big part of that. Usability and packaging are important, but I can deal with issues in those areas when the value is high enough.
I just finished writing a sizable build system wrapper in Perl, a language I dust off once every couple of years. Google found the information I needed, but it wasn't always easy. The official docs assume comfort with all of the magic variables and subtleties of the language, which is worse than with C++ to me. That means the docs are best for experts and off-putting to the inexperienced just trying to make something work. There were, fortunately, other sites that explained things clearly enough to help me.
Boost is in the same boat. The docs assume domain knowledge in many cases, and generally assume language expertise. Anyone lacking that background must rely on other sites to fill in the gap, of which there are fewer than for Perl. Perhaps encouraging reviews from those without domain and language expertise would be smart. That would encourage documentation that helps to build domain knowledge, even if only through links, and doesn't presume language expertise.
Documentation that caters to Joe Programmer should increase the odds that search engines find Boost libraries, and that such programmers pursue using them once found.
___
Rob
(Sent from my portable computation engine)
