17 Apr
2008
17 Apr
'08
8:04 a.m.
schoappied wrote:
M-.-n wrote:
My favorite philosophy of software documentation is what Steven Wolfram
followed when he created Mathematica. He wrote the documentation - what
it would do and how you made it do it. Then the program was written to
do what the book said in the way it said to do it.
Not cheap, but there is a Linux version of the software. I wonder if it
could be used to make music, too?
--
David
gnome(a)hawaii.rr.com
authenticity, honesty, community
Documentation is the thoughest part of releasing
"homebrew" code IMHO.
I'm lucky to have a bunch of entousiastic helping me keeping a wiki up
to date. Also, for the getting started (my tracker definetly needs
that), we've decided to use screencasts, which is going to be nice.
Trashy test sample here:
http://www.10pm.org/nostromo/temp/piggygotjynxed.swf
It's reaaallly easy to do (at least under windows), it's not utube
garbage, and the fact of being able to record audio explaining what you
do is the best thing ever. Of course, it doesn't prevent from needing a
reference manual but it makes part of the explanation a lot easier.
Possibly a similar application must exist for linux
Regards,
Marc
Malte Steiner a écrit :
> Documentation is good and honourable for programmers. One reason the QT
> library is adopted so often is the well done documentation. And I hold
> back the release of my softwaresynthesizer 'Minicomputer' until I wrote
> a manual.
>
This are real good examples of how it can be. Put some discipline in the
project to state that a release is only with good documentation... and
otherwise hold it back for a while.