Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Difficulty in sorting through OCaml documentation #4085

Closed
vicuna opened this issue Aug 15, 2006 · 2 comments
Closed

Difficulty in sorting through OCaml documentation #4085

vicuna opened this issue Aug 15, 2006 · 2 comments

Comments

@vicuna
Copy link

vicuna commented Aug 15, 2006

Original bug ID: 4085
Reporter: @hcarty
Assigned to: @mshinwell
Status: resolved (set by @mshinwell on 2016-12-06T21:29:36Z)
Resolution: fixed
Priority: normal
Severity: feature
Category: documentation
Monitored by: ertai

Bug description

As a person interested in the OCaml language but unfamiliar with the language or its surrounding community, I have found it quite difficult to sort through the existing documentation to find out what is relevant to the current state of the OCaml language and related tools and what is out of date.

One specific example of this is the revised syntax documentation - the document indicates that the syntax is different from the "normal" syntax, but there is no indication of its use or continued development/maintenance. It seems to be a relatively minor issue once one has started using OCaml and working with the community, but it is a barrier for entry when something as simple as syntax is left ambiguous.

Another example is the development of OCaml itself. To be quite honest, from the outside the project looks almost completely stagnant. Some form of news or other information access on the future direction/development of the language and tools would be both useful and comforting for potential users of the language.

@vicuna
Copy link
Author

vicuna commented Dec 6, 2016

Comment author: @mshinwell

I think this matter has been dramatically improved in recent times, and no longer warrants this issue.

@vicuna vicuna closed this as completed Dec 6, 2016
@vicuna
Copy link
Author

vicuna commented Dec 6, 2016

Comment author: @hcarty

I agree - thank you for the cleanup!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants