[erlang-questions] Re: various documentation topics now
Tue Feb 16 14:10:58 CET 2010
I think the community has done pretty well with learning tools, we have
A few of us are in the middle of building a site that organises these
resources. Along with plenty of people blogging about erlang (dukes of erl
etc), I think we are doing pretty well.
There are still lots of gaps around this information, a lot of the otp and
application stuff can still be mystical, but the gap is getting filled up.
and the books do a great job of more comprehensive learning
On 16 February 2010 12:49, Michael Turner <> wrote:
> On 2/16/2010, "Attila Rajmund Nohl" <> wrote:
> >2010/2/16, Michael Turner <>:
> >> Reference manuals are typically huge, Erlang/OTP's is no exception,
> >Somehow my problem with the Erlang reference manual was always that
> >it's not huge enough.
> I'm reminded of the anecdote about the film editor who somehow made a
> "director's cut" release more interesting -- and thus *seem* shorter
> -- than the original theater release, by adding some cuts back in and
> rearranging things a little, actually increasing the running time by 20
> minutes in the process.
> But whatever we do, let's not blame the fine folk at Ericsson. The
> documentation has only been up at github for little while now. And
> Erlang obviously has a lot more Europe penetration than in the (native)
> English speaking world, aside from being a small minority programming
> language anyway. So there's a shortage of people who can really fix it
> up nicely on a volunteer basis, and probably not much internal financing
> for the job within Ericsson.
> I know that I should spend less time on this list and more on
> contributing documentation patches -- typo fixes first, then more
> detailed contributions as my knowledge of Erlang improves and people at
> Ericsson trust that I can improve things. Every day, I see something.
> Apart from that, well ... what Jayson said. (But, um, terrestrially
> rather than ballistically.) He's right. Good docs are an important
> gateway to a language. Erlang has taken an odd path to open source, one
> that perhaps means that a lot of somewhat undercooked draft
> documentation has tumbled out into public view. And it's been a
> relatively small and localized community, making documentation not quite
> so important for a while. I mean, I can't believe I'm on a mailing
> list where a few co-architects of the language are fairly regular
> contributors. It's like back when you'd get Dennis Ritchie (in
> person!) copping to having screwed up bitfields on comp.lang.c in the
> early 80s. I like it. You probably do too. But you have to admit,
> ultimately, Erlang won't succeed without a education/communications
> strategy as scalable as the language itself. Better reference materials
> will be an absolutely essential part of that story.
> -michael turner
> erlang-questions (at) erlang.org mailing list.
> See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html
> To unsubscribe; mailto:
More information about the erlang-questions