Hello, It seems the pharodocs website is broken. Pages for classes are rendered, but the documentation does not display the messages, only their docstrings. That makes it quite unusable. I remember I looked at it once when I started and thought "whee, that's confusing, I'll play around and come back later". Now I understand why that was confusing... Who can fix that?
|
Dear David,
yes this maybe broken, but most of the time, a Pharo developer will never have a look to such a static documentation. You can browse the class and the related methods very easily inside the Pharo image, without relying on an external tool. Regards, On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 1:08 PM, David Allouche <[hidden email]> wrote: > Hello, > > It seems the pharodocs website is broken. Pages for classes are rendered, > but the documentation does not display the messages, only their docstrings. > That makes it quite unusable. > > http://files.pharo.org/doc/4.0/#packageList=package.html&classList=package/Kernel.html&classView=class/ProtoObject.html > > I remember I looked at it once when I started and thought "whee, that's > confusing, I'll play around and come back later". Now I understand why that > was confusing... > > Who can fix that? -- Serge Stinckwich UCBN & UMI UMMISCO 209 (IRD/UPMC) Every DSL ends up being Smalltalk http://www.doesnotunderstand.org/ |
I could argue about how I agree with you, but only in part.
But the simple fact is this: the documentation is advertised in large letter on this page: http://pharo.org/documentation If it's broken, it should be fixed. If the people with the technical access to fix it do not care, it should be removed from such a highly visible page. As it is, it is confusing for new users, who need it most, and reflects badly on the state of Pharo in general. > On 10 Jan 2016, at 22:25, Serge Stinckwich <[hidden email]> wrote: > > Dear David, > > yes this maybe broken, but most of the time, a Pharo developer will > never have a look to such a static documentation. > You can browse the class and the related methods very easily inside > the Pharo image, without relying on an external tool. > > Regards, > > On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 1:08 PM, David Allouche <[hidden email]> wrote: >> Hello, >> >> It seems the pharodocs website is broken. Pages for classes are rendered, >> but the documentation does not display the messages, only their docstrings. >> That makes it quite unusable. >> >> http://files.pharo.org/doc/4.0/#packageList=package.html&classList=package/Kernel.html&classView=class/ProtoObject.html >> >> I remember I looked at it once when I started and thought "whee, that's >> confusing, I'll play around and come back later". Now I understand why that >> was confusing... >> >> Who can fix that? > > > > -- > Serge Stinckwich > UCBN & UMI UMMISCO 209 (IRD/UPMC) > Every DSL ends up being Smalltalk > http://www.doesnotunderstand.org/ > |
On my iPad the docs look like this:
It's an unusable mess. Sent from my iPad > On Jan 10, 2016, at 15:47, David Allouche <[hidden email]> wrote: > > I could argue about how I agree with you, but only in part. > > But the simple fact is this: the documentation is advertised in large letter on this page: http://pharo.org/documentation > > If it's broken, it should be fixed. If the people with the technical access to fix it do not care, it should be removed from such a highly visible page. > > As it is, it is confusing for new users, who need it most, and reflects badly on the state of Pharo in general. > >> On 10 Jan 2016, at 22:25, Serge Stinckwich <[hidden email]> wrote: >> >> Dear David, >> >> yes this maybe broken, but most of the time, a Pharo developer will >> never have a look to such a static documentation. >> You can browse the class and the related methods very easily inside >> the Pharo image, without relying on an external tool. >> >> Regards, >> >>> On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 1:08 PM, David Allouche <[hidden email]> wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> It seems the pharodocs website is broken. Pages for classes are rendered, >>> but the documentation does not display the messages, only their docstrings. >>> That makes it quite unusable. >>> >>> http://files.pharo.org/doc/4.0/#packageList=package.html&classList=package/Kernel.html&classView=class/ProtoObject.html >>> >>> I remember I looked at it once when I started and thought "whee, that's >>> confusing, I'll play around and come back later". Now I understand why that >>> was confusing... >>> >>> Who can fix that? >> >> >> >> -- >> Serge Stinckwich >> UCBN & UMI UMMISCO 209 (IRD/UPMC) >> Every DSL ends up being Smalltalk >> http://www.doesnotunderstand.org/ > > image1.PNG (465K) Download Attachment |
In reply to this post by David Allouche
I agree with you only 100% + 1. Also note that UPBE is not promoted even though its the most begineer friendly documentation we have, instead you have to navigate through the links to get there. On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 1:48 AM David Allouche <[hidden email]> wrote: I could argue about how I agree with you, but only in part. |
> On 11 Jan 2016, at 10:24, Dimitris Chloupis <[hidden email]> wrote: > > I agree with you only 100% + 1. > > Also note that UPBE is not promoted even though its the most begineer friendly documentation we have, instead you have to navigate through the links to get there. There is books.pharo.org PBE is there, I thought UPBE was not yet ready, if it is, it should **definitively** be promoted there and on pharo.org in general. Please push this, this is really important. > AFAIK the documentation page could use some love, promoting our main Book, UPBE, Pharo for the Enterprise , Deep Into Pharo. Those 3 are essential reading for anyone coming to pharo and they are in a pretty good state , though WIP. > > I have to say that I never liked Pharo docs because it shows how few classes contain comments and it definitely does not look good for someone looking to enter pharo. > > On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 1:48 AM David Allouche <[hidden email]> wrote: > I could argue about how I agree with you, but only in part. > > But the simple fact is this: the documentation is advertised in large letter on this page: http://pharo.org/documentation > > If it's broken, it should be fixed. If the people with the technical access to fix it do not care, it should be removed from such a highly visible page. > > As it is, it is confusing for new users, who need it most, and reflects badly on the state of Pharo in general. > > > On 10 Jan 2016, at 22:25, Serge Stinckwich <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > > Dear David, > > > > yes this maybe broken, but most of the time, a Pharo developer will > > never have a look to such a static documentation. > > You can browse the class and the related methods very easily inside > > the Pharo image, without relying on an external tool. > > > > Regards, > > > > On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 1:08 PM, David Allouche <[hidden email]> wrote: > >> Hello, > >> > >> It seems the pharodocs website is broken. Pages for classes are rendered, > >> but the documentation does not display the messages, only their docstrings. > >> That makes it quite unusable. > >> > >> http://files.pharo.org/doc/4.0/#packageList=package.html&classList=package/Kernel.html&classView=class/ProtoObject.html > >> > >> I remember I looked at it once when I started and thought "whee, that's > >> confusing, I'll play around and come back later". Now I understand why that > >> was confusing... > >> > >> Who can fix that? > > > > > > > > -- > > Serge Stinckwich > > UCBN & UMI UMMISCO 209 (IRD/UPMC) > > Every DSL ends up being Smalltalk > > http://www.doesnotunderstand.org/ > > > > |
In reply to this post by John Pfersich
2016-01-11 2:37 GMT+01:00 John Pfersich <[hidden email]>: On my iPad the docs look like this: |
In reply to this post by Sven Van Caekenberghe-2
I think that UPBE is in definitely a better state than PBE. We should switch the link.
@Dimitris: Could you open an issue for this? Doru > On Jan 11, 2016, at 11:37 AM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <[hidden email]> wrote: > > >> On 11 Jan 2016, at 10:24, Dimitris Chloupis <[hidden email]> wrote: >> >> I agree with you only 100% + 1. >> >> Also note that UPBE is not promoted even though its the most begineer friendly documentation we have, instead you have to navigate through the links to get there. > > There is books.pharo.org > > PBE is there, I thought UPBE was not yet ready, if it is, it should **definitively** be promoted there and on pharo.org in general. > > Please push this, this is really important. > >> AFAIK the documentation page could use some love, promoting our main Book, UPBE, Pharo for the Enterprise , Deep Into Pharo. Those 3 are essential reading for anyone coming to pharo and they are in a pretty good state , though WIP. >> >> I have to say that I never liked Pharo docs because it shows how few classes contain comments and it definitely does not look good for someone looking to enter pharo. >> >> On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 1:48 AM David Allouche <[hidden email]> wrote: >> I could argue about how I agree with you, but only in part. >> >> But the simple fact is this: the documentation is advertised in large letter on this page: http://pharo.org/documentation >> >> If it's broken, it should be fixed. If the people with the technical access to fix it do not care, it should be removed from such a highly visible page. >> >> As it is, it is confusing for new users, who need it most, and reflects badly on the state of Pharo in general. >> >>> On 10 Jan 2016, at 22:25, Serge Stinckwich <[hidden email]> wrote: >>> >>> Dear David, >>> >>> yes this maybe broken, but most of the time, a Pharo developer will >>> never have a look to such a static documentation. >>> You can browse the class and the related methods very easily inside >>> the Pharo image, without relying on an external tool. >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 1:08 PM, David Allouche <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>> Hello, >>>> >>>> It seems the pharodocs website is broken. Pages for classes are rendered, >>>> but the documentation does not display the messages, only their docstrings. >>>> That makes it quite unusable. >>>> >>>> http://files.pharo.org/doc/4.0/#packageList=package.html&classList=package/Kernel.html&classView=class/ProtoObject.html >>>> >>>> I remember I looked at it once when I started and thought "whee, that's >>>> confusing, I'll play around and come back later". Now I understand why that >>>> was confusing... >>>> >>>> Who can fix that? >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Serge Stinckwich >>> UCBN & UMI UMMISCO 209 (IRD/UPMC) >>> Every DSL ends up being Smalltalk >>> http://www.doesnotunderstand.org/ >>> >> >> > > -- www.tudorgirba.com www.feenk.com "To utilize feedback, you first have to acquire it." |
In reply to this post by Nicolai Hess-3-2
Thanks.
Doru > On Jan 11, 2016, at 11:40 AM, Nicolai Hess <[hidden email]> wrote: > > I opened a fogbugz issue > 17348 remove pharo documentation link > > 2016-01-11 2:37 GMT+01:00 John Pfersich <[hidden email]>: > On my iPad the docs look like this: > > > > It's an unusable mess. > > Sent from my iPad > > > On Jan 10, 2016, at 15:47, David Allouche <[hidden email]> wrote: > > > > I could argue about how I agree with you, but only in part. > > > > But the simple fact is this: the documentation is advertised in large letter on this page: http://pharo.org/documentation > > > > If it's broken, it should be fixed. If the people with the technical access to fix it do not care, it should be removed from such a highly visible page. > > > > As it is, it is confusing for new users, who need it most, and reflects badly on the state of Pharo in general. > > > >> On 10 Jan 2016, at 22:25, Serge Stinckwich <[hidden email]> wrote: > >> > >> Dear David, > >> > >> yes this maybe broken, but most of the time, a Pharo developer will > >> never have a look to such a static documentation. > >> You can browse the class and the related methods very easily inside > >> the Pharo image, without relying on an external tool. > >> > >> Regards, > >> > >>> On Sun, Jan 10, 2016 at 1:08 PM, David Allouche <[hidden email]> wrote: > >>> Hello, > >>> > >>> It seems the pharodocs website is broken. Pages for classes are rendered, > >>> but the documentation does not display the messages, only their docstrings. > >>> That makes it quite unusable. > >>> > >>> http://files.pharo.org/doc/4.0/#packageList=package.html&classList=package/Kernel.html&classView=class/ProtoObject.html > >>> > >>> I remember I looked at it once when I started and thought "whee, that's > >>> confusing, I'll play around and come back later". Now I understand why that > >>> was confusing... > >>> > >>> Who can fix that? > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Serge Stinckwich > >> UCBN & UMI UMMISCO 209 (IRD/UPMC) > >> Every DSL ends up being Smalltalk > >> http://www.doesnotunderstand.org/ > > > > > > -- www.tudorgirba.com www.feenk.com "Yesterday is a fact. Tomorrow is a possibility. Today is a challenge." |
In reply to this post by Tudor Girba-2
Done
https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/17371/No-direct-link-to-the-UPBE-pdf On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 11:45 AM Tudor Girba <[hidden email]> wrote: I think that UPBE is in definitely a better state than PBE. We should switch the link. |
In reply to this post by Sven Van Caekenberghe-2
Le 11/01/2016 10:37, Sven Van Caekenberghe a écrit :
> > There is books.pharo.org > > PBE is there, I thought UPBE was not yet ready, if it is, it should **definitively** be promoted there and on pharo.org in general. > > Please push this, this is really important. > UPBE is not finish but it is usable. With a text that say to the user that the content may evolve it should be fine. > > -- Cyril Ferlicot http://www.synectique.eu 165 Avenue Bretagne Lille 59000 France signature.asc (836 bytes) Download Attachment |
All manual are being updated and I plan to also release static versions for each pharo release. We made great progress this year with the help of many contributors, we managed to port the entire PBE from latex to pillar and update many chapters to version 4, I have now started the porting to Pharo 5 and will be going through all chapters and updating them as needed and by the end of this year it should finish, from there on will be very easy to keep up with pharo releases. On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 12:04 PM Ferlicot D. Cyril <[hidden email]> wrote: Le 11/01/2016 10:37, Sven Van Caekenberghe a écrit : |
well, pharodocs look fine for me… but can be broken in other sources.
I will need to put an issue in my TODO :( Esteban
|
2016-01-11 13:54 GMT+01:00 Esteban Lorenzano <[hidden email]>:
What happens if you click on one link ? For example, if I click on the arrowDown method link, it scrolls to this text " Answer the Character representing a backspace. Answer the class variable in which unique Characters are stored. Just for ANSI Compliance Added the rest of them! Answer the Character representing a carriage return. Answer the Character whose digit value is x. For example, answer $9 for x=9, $0 for x=0, $A for x=10, $Z for x=35. Answer the Character representing enter. Answer the ASCII ESC character The Euro currency sign, that E with two dashes. The code point is a official unicode ISO/IEC-10646-1 Create the table of DigitsValues."
|
for me, works (on Safari)
|
if i click on a class, displays nothing i have to also click on the method so i assume this is broken on firefox On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 3:14 PM Esteban Lorenzano <[hidden email]> wrote:
|
In reply to this post by Nicolai Hess-3-2
Yes, that's what I talked about in the first place.
Here's the screenshot I should have included at first. See, no method names. Also, if one tries resizing the panes, things start breaking in visually interesting ways…
|
In reply to this post by EstebanLM
On 11 Jan 2016, at 14:12, Esteban Lorenzano <[hidden email]> wrote:On 11 Jan 2016, at 14:09, Nicolai Hess <[hidden email]> wrote: No, apart from the ugly layout at the top (hierarchy mixed with class comment), the main problem is that the method (selector) names are missing at the lower part, which is very confusing. All probably CSS glitches. Where is the project located that generates the web docs ? The problems are browser independent. For example, if I click on the |
In reply to this post by David Allouche
yeah… something is bad, but it shouldn’t :)
pharodocs are statically generated when we release (it takes some time to build it). That could mean is broken since some months (and just now we realised :( ) but well, as I say… I will check it… eventually :) Esteban
|
In reply to this post by David Allouche
yeah i can confirm that as well, but i never tried to resize the panels before, but frankly its not a huge deal, phardoc does not offer anything more than what the pharo image already offers and is many times less flexible. I used only once when i was on vacations and wanted to take a look at a couple of things.
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 3:19 PM David Allouche <[hidden email]> wrote:
|
Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |