Commit graph

8 commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Ed Page
36bc641648 fix(help): Remove extraneous text from built-ins
This is an intermediate solution for #4408.  As there were no agreeed
upon goals, I went with what I felt read well and that I saw commonly
used on non-clap commands.

- "information" isn't really a necessary word.
- I originally favored `Print this help` but realied that doesn't read
  correctly in completions.
- Besides being shorter, the reason for the flipped short/long hint is
  it gives people the context they need for scanning, emphasizing
  "summary" and "more".

Fixes #4409
2023-01-03 11:02:26 -06:00
Ed Page
1039c61c53 fix(error): Be more consistent in error quoting 2022-10-13 10:45:38 -05:00
Ed Page
0184cf008a fix(parser): Quote the suggested help
We do it elsewhere but here it is only distinguished coloring.

Inspired by #4218
2022-09-15 16:24:59 -05:00
Ed Page
c90a4eabae fix(help): Make output more dense
In looking at other help output, I noticed that they use two spaces, in
place of clap's 4, and it doesn't suffer from legibility.  If it
doesn't make the output worse, let's go ahead and make it as dense so we
fit more content on the screen.

This is a part of #4132
2022-09-07 17:13:55 -05:00
Ed Page
9a645d2d19 fix(help): Collapse usage to one line
After looking at more examples, I've become more attached to this
briefer format.

Part of #4132
2022-09-07 11:03:57 -05:00
Ed Page
65b5b5f7bf fix(help): Remove name/version/author from help
This is to help shorten it and polish it by removing redundant
information.

This is a part of #4132
2022-08-31 15:06:15 -05:00
Ed Page
9b23a09f7a fix(help): Don't rely on ALL CAPS for headers
I see them fulfilling two roles
- A form of bolding
- As a callback to their placeholder in usage

However, it is a bit of an unpolished look and no other CLI seems to do
it.  This looks a bit more proefessional.  We have colored help for
formatting and I think the sections relation to usage will be clear
enough.
2022-08-26 10:21:18 -05:00
Ed Page
d43f1dbf6f docs: Move everything to docs.rs
A couple of things happened when preparing to release 3.0
- We needed derive documentation
  - I had liked how serde handled theres
  - I had bad experiences finding things in structopt's documentation
- The examples were broken and we needed tests
- The examples seemed to follow a pattern of having tutorial content and
  cookbook content
- We had been getting bug reports from people looking at master and
  thinking they were looking at what is currently released
- We had gotten feedback to keep down the number of places that
  documentation was located

From this, we went with a mix of docs.rs and github
- We kept the number of content locations at 2 rather than 3 by not
  having an external site like serde
- We rewrote the examples into explicit tutorials and cookbooks to align
  with the 4 styles of documentation
- We could test our examples by running `console` code blocks with
  trycmd
- Documentation was versioned and the README pointed to the last release

This had downsides
- The tutorials didn't have the code inlined
- Users still had a hard time finding and navigating between the
  different forms of documentation
- In practice, we were less likely to cross-link between the different
  types of documentation

Moving to docs.rs would offer a lot of benefits, even if it is only
designed for Rust-reference documentation and isn't good for Rust derive
reference documentation, tutorials, cookbooks, etc.  The big problem was
keeping the examples tested to keep maintenance costs down.  Maybe its
just me but its easy to overlook
- You can pull documentation from a file using `#[doc = "path"]`
- Repeated doc attributes get concatenated rather than first or last
  writer winning

Remember these when specifically thinking about Rust documentation made
me realize that we could get everything into docs.rs.

When doing this
- Tutorial code got brought in as was one of the aims
- We needed to split the lib documentation and the README to have all of
  the linking work.  This allowed us to specialize them according to
  their rule (user vs contributor)
- We needed to avoid users getting caught up in making a decision
  between Derive and Builder APIs so we put the focus on the derive API
  with links to the FAQ to help users decide when to use one or the
  other.
- Improved cross-referencing between different parts of the
  documentation
- Limited inline comments were added to example code
  - Introductory example code intentionally does not have teaching
    comments in it as its meant to give a flavor or sense of things and
    not meant to teach on its own.

This is a first attempt.  There will be a lot of room for further
improvement.  Current know downsides:
- Content source is more split up for the tutorials

This hopefully addresses #3189
2022-07-19 13:30:38 -05:00