Re: Program structure of Pstricks, what is its basic structure?

[David Kastrup]

crashedandburnt1@hotmail.com (Crashedandburnt) writes:

> > And Dr Van Zandt made a civilized comment without calling you any
>                           ^^^^^^^^^ I guess you do not understand
>                           the meaning of the word "assinine".
> > names.  Which is more than can be said for your prior post!

If you put quotation marks about a word, you should use the original
spelling.  Timothy is not illiterate.  And he applied that wording to
your posting, not to you.  And your posting more than deserved that
name.

> > He has offered documentation which is verifiable:  pstricks.doc.
> > 
> > > Although a comment per line of code is not too much,I do not hold
> > > your package to this standard.
> > 
> > A comment per line of code is certainly far too much!  Any reasonably
> > competent programmer doesn't need such handholding; comments are only
> > needed for the nob-obvious sections of code.
> 
> If that is the case why is their any traffic for questions, many
> times basic questions, on this newsgroup at all???? Do a count of
> questions in say 3 week period. There is already a tex book.

There are few questions about PStricks here.

> That is why I stated it to prevent misunderstanding. Some people
> can't take reasonable criticism and mistake it for accusation.

There was no reasonable criticism I remember.

> But get to the point, circumvent the thorny issues. It is the last
> sentence:
> 
> In the coming days, the ability of people to explain the subject of
> this thread will itself testify how well it is documented.
> 
> Show me the votes by giving the explanation, or accept the
> conclusion that documentation is indeed poor.

Uh, the programmer documentation for PStricks is pretty much ok.  The
user level documentation consists of 4 files documenting an earlier
version of it, and 2 files documenting most of the changes since then.

This state of affairs is indeed somewhat dissatisfactory, and has been
such for several years.  It is, however, hardly anything you could
_demand_ from the original author.  While he probably would be the
first pick for commissioning a manual about it, you need not expect
that he should be the cheapest one, were he willing to accept the
assignment.  Why should he, being best qualified?  And to expect that
he should be compelled to do this for free is ridiculous.

Nobody is in a position to demand such a thing, and least of all some
foul-mouthed slanderer hiding behind a pseudonym.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
UKTUG FAQ: <URL:http://www.tex.ac.uk/cgi-bin/texfaq2html>