how to write a tutorial

[Xah Lee]

i've started to read python tutorial recently.
http://python.org/doc/2.3.4/tut/tut.html

Here are some quick critique:

quick example:
If the input string is too long, they don't truncate it, but return it
unchanged; this will mess up your column lay-out but that's usually
better than the alternative, which would be lying about a value. (If
you really want truncation you can always add a slice operation, as in
"x.ljust( n)[:n]".

better:
If the input string is too long, they don't truncate it, but return it
unchanged;
-----------------
delete: Reverse quotes (``) are equivalent to repr(), but their use is
discouraged.
-----------------
similarly, many places mentioning uncritical info such as warning or
reference to other languages should be deleted.

the tutorial should be simple, concise, to the point, stand along.
Perhaps 1/5th length of the tutorial should be deleted for better.
Follow the above principles.

at places often a whole paragraph on some so called computer science
jargons should be deleted. They are there more to showcase inane
technicality than do help the reader. (related, many passages with
jargons should be rewritten sans inane jargon. e.g. mutable object.)

one easy way to understand these principles is to compare perl's
documentation or unix man pages to Python's. The formers are often
irrelevant, rambling on, not stand-along (it is written such that it
unnecessarily requires the reader to be knowledgable of lots of other
things). Python docs are much better, but like many computer language
manuals, also suffers from verbiage of tech jargons. (these jargons or
passages about them are usually there to please the authors
themselves).

A exemplary writing in this direction is the Mathematica manual by
Stephen Wolfram. Any intelligent layman sans computer science degree
can read it straightforwardly, and learn unhindered a language that is
tantamount to features of lisp languages. Such documentation is not
difficult to write at all. (contrary to the lot of "computer
scientists" or IT pundits morons.) All it take is some simple
principles outlined above.
Xah
(e-mail address removed)
http://xahlee.org/PageTwo_dir/more.html

 

[Diez B. Roggisch]

i've started to read python tutorial recently.
http://python.org/doc/2.3.4/tut/tut.html

Finally! It was about time...

Here are some quick critique:

Given that you seem to be totally inert to critique yourself - e.g. your
continued posting of useless language comparison, and the plethorea of
posts requesting to stop that and limit yourself to your mailing list - I
doubt you'll get much attention for that.

 

[drewc]

You should not be giving such advice! (and the crosspost ... WTF?).

I've been trying to follow along with your perl/python yahoo group, but
your posts are terrible.

Perhaps you should provide the output of the code you post. Then i'd
actually know what i'm trying to achieve. As it is i have to cut/paste
your code into an interpreter just to figure out what it does.

What does this have to do with Lisp? (i'm in c.l.l).

drewc

 

[Jeremy Bowers]

i've started to read python tutorial recently.
http://python.org/doc/2.3.4/tut/tut.html

Here are some quick critique:

You don't have the respect points for anyone to give a damn. Step one
would be demonstrating that you understand the language enough to have a
valid opinion, which we're all still waiting on.

 

[John Hunter]

Xah> at places often a whole paragraph on some so called computer
Xah> science jargons should be deleted. They are there more to
Xah> showcase inane technicality than do help the
Xah> reader. (related, many passages with jargons should be
Xah> rewritten sans inane jargon. e.g. mutable object.)

The concept of mutable objects is extremely important in python, and
understanding is the key to answering two recurring newbie questions

* Why can't lists or dictionaries be keys to dictionaries?

* Why does using a list as a default value for a keyword argument in
a function definition often lead to unexpected results?

So it is definitely appropriate material in a tutorial.

As for jargon, it is hard to argue that "object" is inane jargon in
python. In fact, the base class for new-styled classes is indeed
"object", and if you want to write one of these classes yourself, you
need to do 'class MyClass(object)'. So object is not inane jargon in
an object oriented programming language. You still with me?

OK, now on to mutable. mutable means changeable, albeit it's a little
more of an obscure word than changeable, but it does roll off the
tongue a bit more easily. Perhaps 'changeable object' would be more
accessible to some readers, but it doesn't flow as well. So the
python tutorial should perhaps define mutable when it introduces it.
Which it does somewhat implicitly; the first time mutable is mentioned in the
docs, in the context of strings

Unlike strings, which are immutable, it is possible to change
individual elements of a list:


And now for my last musing on a new topic "How to write a critique":
It is much more constructive to suggest new text for documentation
than to brand it inane.

JDH

 

[Frank Buss]

What does this have to do with Lisp? (i'm in c.l.l).

he is a troll, but one who confess this fact:

http://www.xahlee.org/Netiquette_dir/troll.html

 

[CBFalconer]

i've started to read python tutorial recently.
http://python.org/doc/2.3.4/tut/tut.html

Here are some quick critique:

This has absolutely nothing to do with c.l.c, nor most of the
cross-posted groups. F'ups set. Why did you do such a foul
cross-posting in the first place.

 

[M Jared Finder]

i've started to read python tutorial recently.
http://python.org/doc/2.3.4/tut/tut.html

What does this have to do with Perl, Lisp, Scheme, or C?

-- MJF

 

[Jeffrey Cunningham]

i've started to read python tutorial recently.
http://python.org/doc/2.3.4/tut/tut.html

(snip rest of misleading filler)

http://xahlee.org/PageTwo_dir/more.html

The first line is solipsistic (..like..'so what?'). But I think its all
misleading. The real purpose of his cross-post is to get people to visit
his website, ooh-and-ahh at his unique and daring Bush-bashing at the top,
and finally admire (along with Xah himself) the pictures he takes of
himself.

Vanity, vanity, all is vanity...

The only remaining question is 'why does he restrict his cross-posting to
this particular collection of groups?' I don't have an answer to that one.

[incidentally, I'm still cracking up over k.t. and the soldier...]


--Jeff

 

[Xah Lee]

adding to my previosu comment...
In the Python tutorial:
http://python.org/doc/2.3.4/tut/node11.html

the beginning two paragraphs should be deleted. Nobody gives a shit
except a few smug academicians where the author wrote it for pleasing
himself. For 99% of readers, it is incomprehensible and irrelevant.

the first paragraph of 9.1 "A Word About Terminology" is epitome of
masturbation. The entire 9.1 is not necessary.

Large part of 9.2 "Python Scopes and Name Spaces" is again
masturbatory.

--

Most texts in computing are written by authors to defend and showcase
their existence against their peers. In a tutorial, nobody cares how
the language compared to x y and z, or what technicality is it all
about, or some humorous snippet of history only funny to the author
himself.

Particularly for texts in a tutorial context, you want to write it as
simple as possible covering the most useful basic functionalities and
concepts, and self-contained. Not showcasing your knowledge of history
of languages or your linguistic lineage byways.

For example this chapter 9 on Objects, it is not difficult to write it
without making a show of lingoes. One simply write what is of Python,
without thinking about relation to xyz languages or the "computer
science" establishment and their ways of thinkings of namespaces and
scopes and dynamic and statics and inheritances ... fucking bags of
shit.

Also, in the computing industry, documentations and tutorials often
lacks examples. Especially important in tutorials. Be fewer in words,
more in examples. (for example, unix man pages are full of arcane
abstract syntax specifications and inner-working technicalities while
most don't contain a single example of usage that is much needed.)

also, this does not mean beginning to write for dummies as the highly
successful series of "xyz for Dummies" books. These are successful
because the corpus of textbook writers are all inclined and habituated
to chalk up to jargons and intellectualization on the accounts of their
own esteem and careers. Dummy books are moronic because they assumed
the general readers are morons.

PS Another illustrative case is the official Java Tutorial. Python
tutorial is to the point on the whole. The Java Tutorial is completely
asinine. Chalking up to rocket sciences every chance with unhelpful and
misleading drivel.
Xah
(e-mail address removed)
http://xahlee.org/PageTwo_dir/more.html

 

[CBFalconer]

.... snip ...

the first paragraph of 9.1 "A Word About Terminology" is epitome
of masturbation. The entire 9.1 is not necessary.

Large part of 9.2 "Python Scopes and Name Spaces" is again
masturbatory.

PLONK for excessive OT crossposting and trolling.

 

[Dan Perl]

the beginning two paragraphs should be deleted. Nobody gives a shit
except a few smug academicians where the author wrote it for pleasing
himself. For 99% of readers, it is incomprehensible and irrelevant.

the first paragraph of 9.1 "A Word About Terminology" is epitome of
masturbation. The entire 9.1 is not necessary.

Large part of 9.2 "Python Scopes and Name Spaces" is again
masturbatory.

This is a perfect description for your own postings. Why don't you follow
your own advice?

 

[Daniel Bickett]

Most texts in computing are written by authors to defend and showcase

their existence against their peers.

When you aren't busy `showcasing' your ignorance, this is *all* i see
in everything you write.

In a tutorial, nobody cares how
the language compared to x y and z, or what technicality is it all
about, or some humorous snippet of history only funny to the author
himself.

You couldn't be farther from the truth. To preface a document by
illustrating it's similarities to other languages is to better prepare
a reader who may have experience in those languages. As for the
snippet of history, few people desire to live life as cynical as you
do, and one would hope even fewer take their own opinion and assume it
applies to their peers, as you have just done.

Particularly for texts in a tutorial context, you want to write it as
simple as possible covering the most useful basic functionalities and
concepts, and self-contained. Not showcasing your knowledge of history
of languages or your linguistic lineage byways.

You of all people are the least qualified to say this, as you are the
most guilty of such a crime.

For example this chapter 9 on Objects, it is not difficult to write it
without making a show of lingoes. One simply write what is of Python,
without thinking about relation to xyz languages or the "computer
science" establishment and their ways of thinkings of namespaces and
scopes and dynamic and statics and inheritances ... fucking bags of
shit.

Then please be so kind as to give us all a pleasant surprise, and take
the place of the productive reformer rather than the angsty
criticizer. Your vision as to the errors in the tutorial is *clearly*
less clouded than ours, so only *you* are in the position to write the
proper replacement.

Daniel Bickett

 

[Hans Nowak]

the first paragraph of 9.1 "A Word About Terminology" is epitome of
masturbation. The entire 9.1 is not necessary.

Large part of 9.2 "Python Scopes and Name Spaces" is again
masturbatory.

So I can just take a copy of the tutorial to the bathroom next time.
Thanks for the tip, man!

 

[Lucas Raab]

When you aren't busy `showcasing' your ignorance, this is *all* i see
in everything you write.

<snip>

Um, maybe that was his point...

 

[Daniel Bickett]

<snip>

Um, maybe that was his point...

It was a critical comment -- meant to be derogatory. I pointed out
that that is exactly what he does.

Daniel Bickett

 

[alex23]

the first paragraph of 9.1 "A Word About Terminology" is

epitome of masturbation.

I'm tempted to concede this point to you given the sheer overwhelming
testament to onanism that is your website but this is just nonsense.
Defining terms is *always* necessary, it ensures that participants in
whatever dialogue are at least partially using the terms with the same
intent

For 99% of readers, it is incomprehensible and irrelevant.

You're not 99% of the readers, so I find that remark difficult to
swallow. Having read your comments on women, the whole idea that you
have a superior insight into would-be python coders is just obscenely
ludicrous.

- alex23

 

[Chris Mattern]

Having read your comments on women,

I hadn't looked at that part of his site until now. I can only say:
gah. Haven't seen something like that since Dave Sim's infamous
"Tangent" essay.

--
Christopher Mattern

"Which one you figure tracked us?"
"The ugly one, sir."
"...Could you be more specific?"

 

[Daniel Bickett]

I hadn't looked at that part of his site until now. I can only say:
gah. Haven't seen something like that since Dave Sim's infamous
"Tangent" essay.

It's painfully obvious that it is all for the sole purpose of negative
attention.
You guys are just begging for a YHBT ;-)

Daniel Bickett

 

[Daniel Bickett]

[snip]
You guys are just begging for a YHBT ;-)

I apologize, that should have been "we" -- I was criticizing him too.

no-one-wants-to-be-a-hypocrite-ly y'rs,
Daniel Bickett