I find it's better than context7, but that's not saying much
Context7 uses the real documentation of I’m not mistaken and just provides you a RAG mcp
AI documentation you can talk to, for every repo
21–30 of 132 posts
Re: AI documentation you can talk to, for every repo
#22I took a look at a project I maintain[0], and wow. It's so wrong in every section I saw. The generated diagrams make no sense. The text sections take implementation details that don't matter and present them to the user like they need to know them. It's also outdated. I hope actual users never see this. I dread thinking about having to go around to various LLM generated sites to correct documentation I never approved…
> The text sections take implementation details that don't matter and present them to the user like they need to know them. It's also outdated.
The point of the wiki is to help people learn the codebase so they can possibly contribute to the project, not for end users. It absolutely should explain implementation details. I do agree that it goes overboard with the diagrams. I’m curious, I’ve seen other moderately sized repo owners rave about how DeepWiki did very well in explaining implementation details. What specifically was it getting wrong about your code in your case? Is it just that it’s outdated?
Re: AI documentation you can talk to, for every repo
#23The diagrams generated are arbitrary and make no sense. This needs improvements
Re: AI documentation you can talk to, for every repo
#24I took a look at a project I maintain[0], and wow. It's so wrong in every section I saw. The generated diagrams make no sense. The text sections take implementation details that don't matter and present them to the user like they need to know them. It's also outdated. I hope actual users never see this. I dread thinking about having to go around to various LLM generated sites to correct documentation I never approved…
I fear the consequences will be even darker: - Users are confused by autogenerated docs and don’t even want to try using a project because of it - Real curated project documentation is no longer corrected by users feedback (because they never reach it) - LLMs are trained on wrong autogenerated documentation: a downward spiral for hallucinations! (Maybe this one could then force users go look for the official docs? Bu…
> LLMs are trained on wrong autogenerated documentation: a downward spiral for hallucinations! (Maybe this one could then force users go look for the official docs? But not sure at this point…)
On this, I think, we should have some kind of AI-generated meta-tag, like this: https://github.com/whatwg/html/issues/9479
Re: AI documentation you can talk to, for every repo
#25I took a look at a project I maintain[0], and wow. It's so wrong in every section I saw. The generated diagrams make no sense. The text sections take implementation details that don't matter and present them to the user like they need to know them. It's also outdated. I hope actual users never see this. I dread thinking about having to go around to various LLM generated sites to correct documentation I never approved…
> The text sections take implementation details that don't matter and present them to the user like they need to know them. It's also outdated. The point of the wiki is to help people learn the codebase so they can possibly contribute to the project, not for end users. It absolutely should explain implementation details. I do agree that it goes overboard with the diagrams. I’m curious, I’ve seen other moderately size…
I dunno, it seems to be real excited about a VS Code extension that doesn't exist and isn't mentioned in the actual documentation. There's just too many factual errors to list.
Re: AI documentation you can talk to, for every repo
#26I'm very curious how this will turn out, and especially when :) https://github.com/cameyo42/newLISP-Code
Looks really promising:
https://deepwiki.com/cameyo42/newLISP-Code/3.1-newlisp-99-pr...
Re: AI documentation you can talk to, for every repo
#27[deleted]
Re: AI documentation you can talk to, for every repo
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The text sections take implementation details that don't matter and present them to the user like they need to know them. It's also outdated. The point of the wiki is to help people learn the codebase so they can possibly contribute to the project, not for end users. It absolutely should explain implementation details. I do agree that it goes overboard with the diagrams. I’m curious, I’ve seen other moderately size…
I dunno, it seems to be real excited about a VS Code extension that doesn't exist and isn't mentioned in the actual documentation. There's just too many factual errors to list.
>I dunno, it seems to be real excited about a VS Code extension that doesn't exist and isn't mentioned in the actual documentation. There's just too many factual errors to list.
There is a folder for a VS Code extension here[0]. It seems to have a README with installation instructions. There is also an extension.ts file, which seems to me to be at least the initial prototype for the extension. Did you forget that you started implementing this?
[0] https://github.com/blopker/codebook/blob/c141f349a10ba170424...
Re: AI documentation you can talk to, for every repo
#29I wanted to try the tool with a repo I know. After a few attempts to select cars, bus,crosswalks, I got "capchat timeout error".
Re: AI documentation you can talk to, for every repo
#30Do we need this, when we have tools like Claude Code, Codex etc that you can talk to about the codebase they are started in?