Wiki Requests

[TechnoCat]

I don't know, I feel local doesn't fall under the scope of the love wiki.

[tentus]

I don't know, I feel local doesn't fall under the scope of the love wiki.

Yes, the main two points of the wiki are to doc the Love API and to doc things that use Love. But I feel that by not at least mentioning common things that get used in Love (such as local), we effectively erect an entry barrier: you must be this educated to ride. The strength of Love is that it's accessible: shouldn't we play to that strength, by trying to accumulate knowledge as it relates to Love in a logical place?

I know that when I have a usage question my first reference is the wiki. It's sadly lacking though, so I end up reading WOW forums about how to use Lua features, since they aren't covered very well on the wiki.

[thelinx]

I added a require entry but I don't even know where to begin with explaining how it works. I feel like we should have something short up there to introduce people to the idea of require, but explaining how it does paths usually turns into a verbose mess pretty quickly. Ideas?

I personally think standard Lua documentations should be kept separate from the LÖVE wiki.

[slime]

I agree with TechnoCat and thelinx.

[tentus]

Are we hurting for server space? How about a compromise: a consolidated page that lists and links to Lua components that come up a lot in Love, and notes anything special that Lovers ought to know. For example, I feel like the wiki should mention that require in Love 0.8.0 behaves differently from previous versions of Love.

Edit: the very next post I read (http://love2d.org/forums/viewtopic.php? ... 736#p34733) pretty much perfectly illustrates my point.

[TechnoCat]

Are we hurting for server space? How about a compromise: a consolidated page that lists and links to Lua components that come up a lot in Love, and notes anything special that Lovers ought to know. For example, I feel like the wiki should mention that require in Love 0.8.0 behaves differently from previous versions of Love.

No, it doesn't have to do with server space I'm guessing. It has to do with: why should we maintain separate documentation to Lua? Should we have to update the Lua documentation part of our wiki when Lua 5.2 comes out and is included? I mean yeah, LOVE is a good way to learn Lua, but LOVE isn't about teaching Lua. Doesn't however mean we will jump on helping people with learning Lua on an individual basis (which often times points them to PiL anyways).

Edit: the very next post I read (http://love2d.org/forums/viewtopic.php? ... 736#p34733) pretty much perfectly illustrates my point.

That is definitely something special to LOVE though. Changing the behavior of Lua ('require' in this case) in LOVE does warrant a wiki page or notice. 'local' is the same in LOVE as it is in Lua.

[BlackBulletIV]

No, it doesn't have to do with server space I'm guessing. It has to do with: why should we maintain separate documentation to Lua? Should we have to update the Lua documentation part of our wiki when Lua 5.2 comes out and is included? I mean yeah, LOVE is a good way to learn Lua, but LOVE isn't about teaching Lua. Doesn't however mean we will jump on helping people with learning Lua on an individual basis (which often times points them to PiL anyways).

Agreed.

[Robin]

Very much so, the LÖVE wiki is not a place to learn Lua. It's out of scope, and it's superfluous, since the Lua people have excellent documentation themselves (and let's not forget about the Lua-Users wiki). Having Lua documentation here means extra responsibilities and time demands for the devs and the community that could be spent doing much cooler things.

[kraftman]

I don't see what the big deal is with having some documentation for Lua functions, especially ones that are key in development using LOVE. New users are much more likely to read other pages on the wiki than they are to go and read the whole of PiL.

WoWWiki is probably the biggest wiki for any Lua-based platform, and they include the common Lua functions:

http://www.wowwiki.com/Lua_functions

[tentus]

Alright, stalwart determination from the community not to include info on Lua in the Love wiki. I get it, we can end the discussion.

What about common Love variables? Should we delete the entries on dt etc as well?