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 Nobody tells you which stuff is outdated and that you…
Ask HN: What are the most popular libraries with the crappiest documentation?
31–40 of 56 posts
Re: Ask HN: What are the most popular libraries with the crappiest documentation?
#32Re: Ask HN: What are the most popular libraries with the crappiest documentation?
#33On the flip side, does anyone you examples of projects with perfect documentation?
Re: Ask HN: What are the most popular libraries with the crappiest documentation?
#34On the flip side, does anyone you examples of projects with perfect documentation?
I think the Exim spec is pretty much the gold standard for reference documentation, but they need a separate user-friendly introduction too (there was a separate paper book at one point).
Re: Ask HN: What are the most popular libraries with the crappiest documentation?
#35OpenSSL 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.
It still is nowhere near readable.
Re: Ask HN: What are the most popular libraries with the crappiest documentation?
#36This is not quite in the spirit of the question, but I want to vent anyway ;): I was working in LLVM a few months ago and it suffered from the most curiously amateur illegibility problem: every morning (which is the middle of the night in the US), the documentation was deleted and regenerated, which took several hours and meant that during my work day the docs were offline! Had they not thought to generate the docs i…
Re: Ask HN: What are the most popular libraries with the crappiest documentation?
#37Maybe 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?
#38On the flip side, does anyone you examples of projects with perfect documentation?
I've heard that every comment in code follows the same pattern: every line becomes smaller and smaller. There is a lot of dedication in this project.
Re: Ask HN: What are the most popular libraries with the crappiest documentation?
#39Re: Ask HN: What are the most popular libraries with the crappiest documentation?
#40WebRTC is very poorly documented, especially considering how well most of the other Web APIs are documented. There are lots of tutorials with example in the wild that are now outdated. The rare bit of up-to-date documentation only show the most basic usage. And nobody has any idea how to trap, handle, and recover from errors. Samesies for every wireless communication protocol I've used. ZWave, Zigbee, Bluetooth. Anyt…
Just look at this: https://webrtc.org/native-code/native-apis/ - a couple of high level diagrams, and links to headers.