User Guide: Libraries vs Core Classes

[eluser]oribani[/eluser]
[quote author="n0xie" date="1252675064"]
The distinction between a core class and a library becomes quite clear once you use them (which would make this whole discussion a waste of time), which is probably why no one has thus far complained about it. I'm not saying your point isn't valid, it just seems to me like you never actually tried using the framework, but gladly offer your opinion about it.[/quote]

I disagree. I think the user guide is well written -- it explains the rest of the system very well. I am playing with it as I work through the user guide, and don't have trouble understanding most everything. The only issue that I am pointing out is twofold: arbitrary nomenclature for some things and the confused use of "native libraries" and "core classes" that refer to the same thing on two separate pages.

[quote author="n0xie" date="1252675064"]
I would suggest using the framework for a week, and if you still have problems grasping what a core class is and where it differs from a library or an helper, I'm pretty sure the community at large will gladly guide you on your way.[/quote]

I think you're letting the user guide off too easy. Anyhow, this is exactly what I'm doing: I'm asking the community to clear up why on one page I see "native libraries" and instructions on how to extend/override them and the same instructions on the next page for "core classes" and from all I can tell, they are the same things. If it's such a simple distinction, why can't anyone post a quick reply explaining it? Otherwise, a simple "oh yeah, the manual needs to have that fixed" would probably wrap this up. But I haven't heard either one so far...

The discussion about the arbitrary nature of what a "helper" is versus "plugins", "libraries" and so forth is a tangential conversation - it might be nice for CI to consider better nomenclature for an even easier-to-understand user guide and implementation path, but it's not about someone being wrong and someone else being right, and not about any mistakes. This part is just talking about accurate language and so forth - just an interesting thing to discuss and contribute to the community.

[eluser]oribani[/eluser]
[quote author="wiredesignz" date="1252676201"]@oribani, Nobody is bailing,[/quote]

[quote author="wiredesignz" date="1252665529"]so I'll leave this. [/quote]

So which is it?

[quote author="wiredesignz" date="1252676201"]
but what is NOT cool is your compulsion to publicly berate CodeIgniter over things that don't bother anyone else.[/quote]

Huh? I'm pointing out a problem in the user guide (and suggesting that some of CI's nomenclature could be better). I'm not berating anyone. I keep repeating myself only because no one seems to understand the point I am making (no one is able to specifically address it so far). I suspect that's the orange kitchen syndrome.... the reason you say they "don't bother anyone else" is exactly as jedd so aptly pointed out:

[quote author="jedd" date="1252646713"]
I suspect that we're all a bit immune to noticing the quirks and redundancies in the manual. Like how you get used to an orange-painted kitchen after 6 months, and don't understand why everyone hurls when they visit.[/quote]

So maybe instead of accusing me of wrongly "berating" CI "in public" (what's wrong with that?), you can just address my point. As I said, either the manual is wrongly calling "core classes" "native libraries", or I missed something. Why's that so hard to answer to?

The discussion about general nomenclature is just a side note that seems interesting enough to talk about as long as we're trying to clear up some other confused language in the user guide.

[eluser]oribani[/eluser]
Oh, and since this has devolved into an "in defense of CI" thread, I would like to suggest that the great defenders of CI take a step back.

jedd has the right attitude - as someone new to CI and who is capable of understanding the technical details and has the time to at least post about some inconsistencies I've found, my input should be highly valued. Newcomers can help answer important questions related to how easy certain software is to learn and use and how well user manuals were written, etc.

I didn't post this thread to "berate" CI. I clearly stated, actually, that the user guide is well written for the most part. I posted with the intent of clearing up a poorly-written couple pages. That's it. There's not any need to feel defensive. Every project has things that need to be improved. Your dear CI is no exception.