On 2005.12.16 01:00, James Britt <james_b / neurogami.com> wrote:
> Doug H wrote:
> > I'd recommend the exact opposite.  If you ignore the libraries and GUI
> > toolkits, the book is virtually useless.  Most people are using ruby to
> > develop _applications_, not to learn programming for programming's
> > sake.
> 
> Coding applications in Ruby without taking full advantage of what makes
> Ruby Ruby is like walking up a hill backwards.  You'll get where you
> want to go, but it could be so much nicer.
> 
> A guide to libraries would be handy, but indeed many are ephemeral or in
> flux, and learning a set of distinct APIs for one thing or another is no
> substitute for a proper understanding of Ruby itself.
> 
> It's the difference between being a [application|library] scripter and a 
> Ruby programmer.

I would say the best approach would be to introduce ruby idioms
using existing libraries as code examples. This would likely
contrast nicely with readers' previous experience.

But Hal knows best, so we shall see what he comes up with :)

> James


E