M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:
> For someone new to programming who choses to learn starting with Ruby,
> though, perhaps our introductory "textbooks" ought to emphasize a coding
> style that promotes factoring and readability at an equal or even
> greater level than the basics of how to construct classes, objects,
> methods, expressions and the other semantic elements of the language.

The introductory textbooks are supposed to teach someone to code ruby, 
not to proselytize the virtues of clean design. And for what it's worth, 
the code examples in those (and all books) almost always are very short, 
without convoluted methods with three levels of nesting like you always 
end up with when you get someone else's code to maintain *sulk*.

Putting actual emphasis on those would be beyond the scope of said 
books, even if mentioning the gotchas of the loose syntax in the 
appropriate parts of the book wouldn't be out of place. The problem is 
the appropriate parts tend to be towards the end of the books in the 
boring grammar treatises where people new to programming actually get to.

Also, readability is in the eye of the observer, I'm sure there's people 
with macho-programmer nerve-twitches aplenty that would find guides like 
that personally insulting. I know I met a lot... (C# partial classes 
fanboys in specific.)

David Vallner