Mail Archives: djgpp/1996/06/13/19:48:36
> > Perhaps there should be a "short FAQ" with pointers to the rather daunting
> > "big FAQ" which is justifiably so big that there will come a time when the
> This is already done. If you need an answer for a specific question, you
> should look it up either in the table of contents or in the indices at
> the end of the FAQ. I submit that new users should read the entire FAQ,
> at least superficially, but people who don't want to read the whole thing
> can just look up their problems or issues that are of interest to them
> using the contents and the indices. (I'm unsure about whether people
> actually use the indices, though, and if so, what are their experience,
> because nobody ever told me anything about this.)
I actually very rarely use the FAQ, I generally use the info command more...
> I think making 2 FAQ lists instead of one will add to confusion and make
> their maintenance more complex. So I want to make the FAQ easily
> searchable so it won't be necessary to read large chunks of text just to
> find an answer to a specific question.
Not if one is say something like "Starters FAQ", with the readme stating
that if the person is new to djgpp or programming in dos in general, then
they should start with the starters faq...and yes it would be much more work,
and this could be one of the deciding factors in the end result...but then
again, the beginners faq would probably only have the be written once...
but then again...... ;)
> > (text) version will be too large to read with QEdit.. but then, all the
> > more reason to use Emacs compiled with DJGPP.. :)
> Why don't you read the Info version of the FAQ with info.exe? It has a
> search command. The search strategy should be this:
> * Go to one of the 2 indices.
> * Use `s' (search) command to search for the word(s) pertinent to
> your problem, or just browse through the index (it's organized in
> alphabetic order) and look up the issue you are interested in.
> * Use `m' (menu-item) command to go to the section which
> references the issue.
Well, this is good, and how I view most of my docs, except for someone who is
new to this sort of thing. For you and myself, this is simple, and anything
we dont know, we just simply look up. For someone who doesnt have a clue
this isnt as abvious.
Leathal.
- Raw text -