When one visits JuliaDebug, the page shows about a dozen repos but no guidance as to what does what, what is live, and how to make sense of it all. I don’t have a good answer yet, but how about you all?

Generally organization pages aren’t the best place for this kind of information — and they don’t, anyway, see https://github.community/t/readme-for-organization-front-page/2920/

The JuliaImages links to a common web page which provides orientation among all packages in the org (the page itself is hosted by github pages and defined as a repo inside the org). I’m not sure whether such a page is hard to maintain in the long run.

There is this info for the Gallium package: [image] It is good information, but this really should be somewhere at the top, shoudn’t it? Gallium is obsolete, so who is going to visit? It is a pity Github organizations have no facilities for displaying information about them. There is only the one-line description.

The Julia documentation has no information on debugging. I guess there was no time in the past, but isn’t it time this information was included?

I think this is just a consequence of the face that Julia’s docs are mostly reference rather than tutorial focused. I think it would be a great idea for Julia Computing to hire someone to give the docs a fairly major overflow. Ideally, we would have an official tutorial style set of docs, and cut the our docs to more of a reference.

[image] Non-friendly documentation New to Julia I would like to point out that I found the Julia manual helpful when I started using it. But in truth some of the things made sense only a long way down the road, and some I skipped, at least initially. In my opinion the manual blurs together the four kinds of user documentation, with attendant reduction in efficiency. In other words, the four “boxes” [image] are visited in this single document with little or no separation. I personally try to follow in my own packages the view of the sw…

Yeah. The question on my mind is it it’s possible for us to make the switch without someone dedicated to doing it. Given how big our current docs are, fixing this would take a ton of work, and can’t really be broken up into small pieces.

No, someone has to champion the remake, and someone has to do the work. It will be a major effort, but in the long run I believe it is essential.

[image] PetrKryslUCSD: a pity Github organizations have no facilities for displaying information about them You can pin repositories (somehow), and maybe the most useful/active ones should be, as a hint to those most (three) useful: I use none of these (directly) except for Infiltrator.jl which is pretty neat. I guess I’ll use the debuggers in IDEs eventually, VSCode (maybe Juno, still use both), but that doesn’t apply to you (none for your favorite editor? other than in the REPL), and most users are going to use (that) IDE and need not look up anything. I’m also told Cthulhu.jl is pretty neat. EDIT: I forgot, Rebugger.jl seems very neat too.

I don’t remember where I saw that, but I think VSCode has ~30% of Julia users. That leaves 70% hunting for answers…

The JuliaDebug repo: how to be helpful to newbies (and old hands as well)?

General Usage

PetrKryslUCSD October 2, 2020, 2:39pm 13

Topic		Replies	Views
Are Revise, PackageCompiler, and Pkg "part of Julia", and how do we better share them? Internals & Design	46	4857	October 25, 2023
Non-friendly documentation New to Julia question , documentation	136	11158	September 18, 2020
Guide the user through ?-REPL (Help mode) Internals & Design	14	1598	July 15, 2018
Blog post about my experiences with Julia Community	258	20642	June 19, 2022
Write documentation PRs not blog posts Teaching & Outreach discussion	36	3482	July 30, 2023

The JuliaDebug repo: how to be helpful to newbies (and old hands as well)?

Related topics