Peter Funk said: > The library documentation provides a existing logical subdivision into > chapters, which group the library into several kinds of services. > IMO this subdivision could be discussed and possibly revised. > But at the moment I got the impression, that it was simply ignored. > Why? What's so bad with it? Ka-Ping Yee writes: > I did look at the documentation for some guidance in arranging > the modules, though admittedly it didn't direct me much. The library reference is pretty well disorganized at this point. I want to improve that for the 1.6 docs. I received a suggestion a few months back, but haven't had a chance to dig into it, or even respond to the email. ;( -Fred -- Fred L. Drake, Jr. <fdrake at acm.org> Corporation for National Research Initiatives
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4