Re: boo-boo in run docs?

On 11/6/25 8:18 AM, Peter Pentchev wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 06, 2025 at 06:16:28PM +0200, Peter Pentchev wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 06, 2025 at 02:27:43AM -0800, ToddAndMargo via perl6-users wrote:
>>> On 11/6/25 1:57 AM, Peter Pentchev wrote:
>>>> It doesn't need to be; the documentation of `run` already points to
>>>> the documentation of `Proc`, as you point out.
>>>
>>> In that case, "run's" documentation should have ended at
>>> the Proc link.  None of the examples should have been
>>> included.  No need for further discussion.
>>
>> That is not true, since the examples document how one can use `run`
>> to start a program; the fact that the returned value is a `Proc`
>> object does not matter. The documentation for `run` documents how
>> you use `run`; the documentation for `shell` documents how you
>> use `shell`. In both cases, they refer to the documentation for `Proc`
>> so that they don't have to repeat what is already written there.
> 
> ...and, perhaps even more importantly, so that the documentation for
> either `run` or `shell` does not need to be changed if something
> changes in `Proc`.

Agreed

> 
> G'luck,
> Peter
> 

So why put any examples in shell and run?  Just refer to
Proc.