3 ms·
This reminds me of the jQuery docs situation. Every month or so somebody comes up with an alternative way to access them that's flashy and uses <div> frames wit
by glesica 15y ago
This reminds me of the jQuery docs situation. Every month or so somebody comes up with an alternative way to access them that's flashy and uses <div> frames with low contrast text and lots of shadows and gradients. I play with the site for 60 seconds thinking "this is neat", and then go back to using the official docs because they come up in a Google search.
I don't think I've ever actually accessed the Python docs in any other way in fact. Same goes for Django. They're clean, static HTML, totally trivial for search engines to index and you always get just what you think you're getting when you click over from a search engine.
Also, unrelated: I learned something today. I read the claim that Python and Ruby are roughly the same age and thought "no way, Python is old-as-hell, Ruby can't be nearly as old". But then Wikipedia pointed out that Python is only 4 years older (1991 vs. 1995).
- tripzilch 15y ago> I don't think I've ever actually accessed the Python docs in any other way in fact. Same goes for Django. They're clean, static HTML, totally trivial for search engines to index and you always get just what you think you're getting when you click over from a search engine. I usually download them as local static HTML so I can also access them when I'm coding without stray wireless packets floating in the air.
- glesica 15y agoI've actually done this as well, should have mentioned that. Also, the Django docs can be easily compiled into a (very large) ebook in epub format. I put a copy on my Nook. Comes in handy every now and then.
- creamyhorror 15y agoAnd Ruby is actually (slightly) older than Javascript (96/97). Funny how things look when you've been seeing JS for a decade and a half and Ruby is this new shiny thing (but it actually isn't). Same with Python.