On Fri, Aug 22, 2025 at 11:54:35AM -0500, Clinton Bunch wrote: > Neither has strong support for generating documentation in the other > format. Sphinx treats both as first-class "citizens". https://www.gnu.org/software/texinfo/manual/texinfo/texinfo.html#Output-Formats plain text and epub are pretty cool! the missing one is zeal docset (https://zealdocs.org/). I see this usage growing and have to admit it's pleasant to use when you are a GUI person. > I frequently find it hard to use and default to zshall. "What was the name > of that sub man page again?" "Which of these two sub man pages would have > the information I'm looking for?" good take: I sometimes have the problem with some of the zsh manuals, never with the perl ones. I think it's due to the way information is dispatched: apropos \^zsh zsh (1) - the Z shell zshall (1) - the Z shell meta-man page zshbuiltins (1) - zsh built-in commands zshcalsys (1) - zsh calendar system zshcompctl (1) - zsh programmable completion zshcompsys (1) - zsh completion system zshcompwid (1) - zsh completion widgets zshcontrib (1) - user contributions to zsh zshexpn (1) - zsh expansion and substitution zshmisc (1) - everything and then some zshmodules (1) - zsh loadable modules zshoptions (1) - zsh options zshparam (1) - zsh parameters zshroadmap (1) - informal introduction to the zsh manual The Zsh Manual zshtcpsys (1) - zsh tcp system zshzftpsys (1) - zftp function front-end zshzle (1) - zsh command line editor the weird ones are: * zsh and zshroadmap should be zsh (a unique entry point) * sometimes I don't know if's zshbuiltins, zshmisc and zshcontrib I really think this problem will not be fixed with the info system as the structure remains the same. I would like to make some proposals here. I tried once but realize I'm not fluent enough in english to write tech doc. > Man is good for reference on small single use programs. please take a look at man perl to see the way they organized the documentation. the tutorial section is awesome. the whole thing is writen in POD and those pages are actually available on the CPAN site: https://metacpan.org/dist/perl/view/pod/perlootut.pod > > * it's here for bad reasons (mostly active lobbying at the time when > > the unix culture was mostly ignored) > > Python was one of the early adopters of micro-service architecture and has … sorry I bring this on the list. I shouldn't. If we meet at a conference, it's the perfect topic to share around a beer. > > * it can be defeated. > Eventually it will go the way of perl and eventually COBOL, but until then, > it has its purpose. Right now it is a highly marketable skill. So you think Perl is gone? that's cute :) Perl had some adoption problems when people came to the IT as windows users with java background. unix idioms and FP style were unusual and unconfortable for people stuck in procedural style and filled of OOP bigotery. but * lot of hackers stuck on perl for lot of good reasons * perl and its ecosystem never stopped to evolve * young generations of programmers have no fear of unix and lambdas anymore so they are receptive to perl idioms and expressivity So perl is definetely not dead. regards. -- Marc Chantreux Pôle CESAR (Calcul et services avancés à la recherche) Université de Strasbourg 14 rue René Descartes, BP 80010, 67084 STRASBOURG CEDEX 03.68.85.60.79
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature