Documentation

[hdgarrood]

It would be lovely to have a little more documentation.

For example, while the Rendered type itself is fairly self-explanatory — either I'll have nothing, or some inline styles, or a stylesheet, or both — it's not clear to me in what situations I'll get each of these things, or what I can do (if anything) to ensure that I do get a stylesheet at runtime, and not a Nothing or a This which only contains an Inline.

[sharkdp]

I'd also be interested in this.

[shinzui]

I wonder how many developers evaluating whether to learn and adopt PureScript give up before starting because core packages don't even have a basic Readme to get started. I suggested PureScript recently to a developer and pointed them to purescript-css when they asked about css-in-js in PureScript. Looking into purescript-css was enough for them to stop listening to me.

[hdgarrood]

@shinzui this is not a helpful addition. Please consider what it’s like to receive comments like this in your inbox as a maintainer before posting next time.

[shinzui]

@hdgarrood I apologize. I agree I was harsh, I should have phrased it better.

[JordanMartinez]

I wonder how many developers evaluating whether to learn and adopt PureScript give up before starting because core packages don't even have a basic Readme to get started.

@shinzui The lack of documentation, tutorials, guides, etc. in various repos is a well-known problem in PureScript. This 'issue' does not consider the larger focus of the core contributors and their concerns as a whole. It seems that the current focus of the core contributors has not been on improving documentation (though they would like that to improve, I'm sure) as much as it has been on improving the language, so that future language releases don't include breaking changes that makes such documentation go out-of-date very quickly.
For context, see chexxor/purescript-documentation-discussion#39