[simoncion]

> But you can't paper over other deficiencies with documentation, especially if you find yourself referring the same documentation again and again. It's an indication that you're dealing with an abstraction that can't easily be internalized.

> Their difference with bash documentation is that you get the idea in a single glance.

> If properly designed, such expansive documentation would be unnecessary, as they would be obvious even with the abstractions.

What is it the kids say? "Tell me you don't make use of 'multiprocessing', 'subprocess', and other such inherently-complicated modules without telling that you don't..."? Well, it's either that, or you that often use them, and rarely use bash I/O redirections... because, man, the docs for just the 'subprocess.Popen' constructor are massive and full of caveats and warnings.

[goku12]

You're resorting to non sequiturs, nitpicking and vague assertions to just skirt around the point here. Python syntax rarely confuses people as much as bash does. Look at this entire discussion list for example.

subprocess module isn't a reasonable example to the contrary, because it isn't Python's syntactical sugar that makes it confusing. And even in case of modules that aren't well designed, the language developers and the community strive to provide a more ergonomic alternative.

But instead of addressing the point, you decided to make it about me and my development patterns based on some wild reasoning. But that's not surprising because this started with you asserting that it's the developers' fault that bash appears so confusing to them. Just some worthless condescension instead of staying on topic. What a disgrace!