[erlang-questions] Erlang documentation (was: Apology)

Kenneth Lakin <>
Tue Sep 20 08:13:58 CEST 2016


On 09/19/2016 10:07 PM, Luke wrote:
> Why doesn't anyone ever mention that the docs just look crap?

I'm fond of how the docs look and -for the most part- reasonably pleased
with how they're organized. (In particular, the /doc/man/$MODULE.html
structure is _absolutely killer_ for reference documentation.) IMO, the
quality and general completeness of the Erlang reference manuals is what
most projects should strive to emulate in their API documentation.

> These days programmers have largely become accustomed to a
> certain look and feel...

I _really_ don't like how a _lot_ of "modern" documentation is laid out.
If you're looking for inspiration, a _really_ impressive reference
manual + user's guide (that -undoubtedly- took a _ton_ of work to put
together) is the Postgresql documentation.

> I think allowing pull requests would be a big step forward.

https://github.com/erlang/otp/pulls

I know for a fact that documentation updates are accepted. :)


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20160919/d514344f/attachment.bin>


More information about the erlang-questions mailing list