Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: What are the most popular libraries with the crappiest documentation?

news.ycombinator.com

1–10 of 56 posts

Re: Ask HN: What are the most popular libraries with the crappiest documentation?

#2
The chances that you'd get responses to your question would be higher if you explained why you're asking the question.

Also, I doubt there are any popular libraries with ^crappy^ documentation. why even use such a strongly negative word?... Disagree that it is strongly negative? Well I think your question is crappy.

Re: Ask HN: What are the most popular libraries with the crappiest documentation?

#4
Maybe it's just me, but I never got around liking the jQuery documentation. Its not bad - but visually too heavy, not easy to navigate and the example code is often not very consistent. Counterexample: The lodash documentation.

Sidenote: A very nice project that aggregates many API documentations and puts them into a coherent style and nice UX is http://devdocs.io/

Re: Ask HN: What are the most popular libraries with the crappiest documentation?

#6
Android when you go one level deeper than the most high-level api. It's easy to record a file with AudioRecord(), but getting the audio stream to handle some analysis yourself is way harder. I'm not the best android programmer and had to read the C code underneath to get to the stuff below the "MediaRecorder".

Oh and Android design standards and best practices... Nobody tells you which stuff is outdated and that you need to use compatibility stuff by default to keep things working on more devices etc... Also no technical description on how to implement Material Design at all and some quirky problems are really common (e.g. negative margin on a button, easy in html/css, but impossible that way in Android).

edit: my new favourite android fuck-up though is having the icons for horizontal and vertical layouts swapped: http://i.imgur.com/xJ1ODI3.png "vertical" = child elements are underneath each other.

Re: Ask HN: What are the most popular libraries with the crappiest documentation?

#8
OpenSSL is rather inscrutable. They've actually been doing great work on the code and I'd say it's pretty secure now. But the documentation is still a mess. I recently had to resort to inferring the correct way to do something with OpenSSL by looking at how OpenSSL itself deals with that particular task + extensive testing, because documentation on certain operations appeared to be absent. No bueno.
Post reply on HN