"RTFM" Is Not a Putdown

RTFM! The initialism that always comes across as a rebuff to a query. I have done a few Google searches on the topic, so why is user_xyz under the assumption that I want to be spoonfed?

It turns out that a sequence of carefully crafted Google searches, followed by reading the most promising articles returned by the searches isn’t a replacement for reading the documentation. Neither is tinkering with the library for hours. This fact is even more glaring in some kinds of development than others.

I dabbled into a little operating systems development recently. The importance of reading the official documentation of the technologies I was working with was impressed upon me more than at any time in my life because of how much clarity I took away from carefully consuming the Multiboot Specification compared to the fuzzy state of mind I was in when all I was going on were reading x86 assembly code using multiboot and responses to forums questions about the topic.

I let that spur me on and read the fine print of every tool I needed. I wouldn’t just copy that linker script and tinker with it. I would read the GNU Linker Command Language documentation instead. As you would expect, my experience was so much more pleasant with this documentation-first approach. RTFMing is another of those engineering truisms. We know them, but we practice them not.

The next time I came across a response that nudged me to RTFM, I was gracious. No more would I consider it a rebuttal by masochists. The documentation/specification/manual of that topic you’re struggling with provides the clarity you need. Save yourself the Google searches, articles, forum questions, trials and errors. RTFM is not a rude response. It is the gospel.

(n * 60) minutes of debugging can save you n minutes of reading the documentation.