It seems to be the general rule of thumb that, when you want to google for an oracle error message, then exclusion of both oracle documentation site, and developer forums is your first criteria on the search bar. Same applies to Microsoft (large parts of MSDN), and now Amazon Web Services documentation (at least some parts of it). That's the reason StackOverflow works - it really solves programmer's problems, instead…
* Rust's examples work, because the default behaviour of Rust's automated testing is to test your documented examples (as well as any unit tests you wrote), so, it's actually more effort to write examples that don't work. If you're too lazy for that, you're going to not write any examples, so then I at least know I'm in uncharted territory.
* The relevant Rust source code is linked. Mostly. Rust's source links don't chase macros, so it's conceivable your link tells you that foo(X) is just the result of the macro make_thing!(foo,X) and you need to chase how make_thing!() is defined which is annoying. But 99% of the time you discover immediately what's actually going on.
This week I would say about half of my time was spent fighting with the C# library for talking to the Microsoft Graph API. Both of which are, in theory, "documented" and yet I repeatedly ended up cribbing from Stack Overflow answers or, after beating my head against a wall, pasting URLs (which I already know will go stale in a year or two) and Microsoft's uselessly bland explanations for the obviously broken stuff as the excuse for why we can't do things you would obviously anticipate being possible.
Today I particularly liked: There are five documented ways to make an educationClass. Most of them simply don't work (unanswered Issues on github), and the error responses for these methods are undocumented and lead nowhere. But one of them does work. However the C# library drops the output of the API call for that method on the floor, presumably because coping with this case was hard, and so the best option (as a Stackoverflow post explains) is to reach inside the library, dredge out the HTTP request it's about to do, and perform that request yourself, then do all the heavy lifting they couldn't be bothered to do with the HTTP response to get what you actually wanted (including a polling loop because apparently nothing after the 1980s happened for Microsoft).
However, in the months since that Stackoverflow post was written, the C# library API has changed, enough that the example code wouldn't even build.
The change is undocumented (of course) and involves an enumeration (also undocumented) which was auto-generated for some reason. This feels like somebody was hoping it wouldn't matter if they changed it, and that somebody was wrong. But if they'd been forced to document it then maybe they'd have either decided it wasn't worth it (still works as before) or I'd have saved ten minutes guessing how the API now works.
But now it's the weekend and I'm going to write Rust.