random example of doc confusion, re: Array.getOrFail

[Raoul Duke]

hi,

(a) http://elm-lang.org/blog/announce/0.12.1.elm
seems to mention getOrFail, getOrElse.

(b) http://package.elm-lang.org/packages/elm-lang/core/2.0.1/Array
doesn't, at all.

[i really wish the 'view source' link went to the actual source file,
not to the top level of the github repo.]

(c) https://github.com/elm-lang/core/blob/2.0.1/src/Array.elm
does not, either.

what am i (or any newbie) supposed to believe? how would i (or any
newbie) know? should (a) just be removed from the internet?

thanks for any thoughts.

[Janis Voigtländer]

This API has changed since the 0.12.1 version of Elm. Maybe a warning on that page would be appropriate. Taking it down completely, why? Do other software projects wipe the release notes for version x.y from the internet because a later version z.u leads to changes?

About the behavior of the ‘view source’ link, I agree, and have opened a GitHub issue. Maybe you can contribute by figuring out how the correct link can be made from the ingredients available in the there linked to function, and submit a pull request?

​

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Elm Discuss" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to elm-discuss...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Max Goldstein]

I think something like this has come up before. A generic warning on all announcements except the most recent might be a good thing.

Notice: this is an announcement of an old version of Elm kept for historical purposes. For the latest information on APIs and language syntax, please see the docs [link].

Ideally it could be added server-side automatically.

[Raoul Duke]

> This API has changed since the 0.12.1 version of Elm. Maybe a warning on
> that page would be appropriate. Taking it down completely, why? Do other
> software projects wipe the release notes for version x.y from the internet
> because a later version z.u leads to changes?

If you base your concept of what is Right upon what other projects do,
then I can see how things could end up sucking in Elm just as much as
all the other projects around, when it comes to documentation at
least.

There's this new-fangled technology called "web search engines" that
is the real boss of us. And if you aren't paying attention to SEO of
your docs, things like this happen to newbies *all the time* so much
that you don't even know who is dropping out in the first 5 minutes
because it is such a morass of conflicting information.

So, yes, /at least/ a warning.

[Raoul Duke]

> About the behavior of the ‘view source’ link, I agree, and have opened a
> GitHub issue. Maybe you can contribute by figuring out how the correct link
> can be made from the ingredients available in the there linked to function,
> and submit a pull request?

or, Just change the button to say "fork me on github" and it would
suck that much less. When something can set up and then drastically
fail to meet expectations, that is bad user experience. If the
inferred-promised yet-utterly-missed expectation is too hard to meet,
then change the requirements! or something.