| 1 |
James Cloos posted on Tue, 06 Apr 2010 10:27:36 -0400 as excerpted: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
>>>>>> "MH" == Michael Higgins <linux@×××××××.org> writes: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> MH> Yep. Why have a man page for a perl module? OTOH, if there is |
| 6 |
> something MH> that goes in /usr/bin, it should get a man page if there |
| 7 |
> is one. But MH> not for the modules themselves -- that's not needed at |
| 8 |
> all. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Because man(1) works better than the alternatives; it is the unix way; |
| 11 |
> it is the first thing one types when searching for documentation. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> The idea that the man pages are somehow uneeded is incomprehensible. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
While you're correct in the ordinary case, keep in mind that this is perl |
| 16 |
developer docs we're talking about here -- not ordinary user documentation. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
And those that know enough about perl to find the developer documentation |
| 19 |
useful should also know how to use perldoc, while those that don't know |
| 20 |
how to use perldoc, aren't likely to find the perl developer manpages of |
| 21 |
much help, either; they'll be pretty much ordinary users, at least where |
| 22 |
perl is concerned, and thus if anything, confused and irritated by all |
| 23 |
those extra "useless" perl developer manpages. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
-- |
| 26 |
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. |
| 27 |
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- |
| 28 |
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman |
Archives