In article <pan.2002.07.31.02.21.23.199006.6766 / nothanks.com>, stibbs <stibbs / nothanks.com> wrote: >On Thu, 29 Aug 2002 20:12:24 -0400, Lyle Johnson wrote: > >> stibbs wrote: >> >>>Hi, first i would like to state that i absolutely love Ruby more than >>>any other language i use (perl, python, PHP, javascript, and now ruby). >>>Others i work with also have taken a look at Ruby and most have the same >>>feeling about it i do. That being said, we found that there is a huge >>>lack of english documentation and therefore would consume to much of our >>>time to learn it and apply it for use in our work. >>> >> The Ruby book list: >> >> http://www.rubygarden.org/ruby?RubyBookList >> >> lists a considerable number of English-language books. "Programming >> Ruby", the one that most Ruby users consider to be a "must-have", is >> freely available on-line here: >> >> http://www.rubycentral.com/book >> >> It's also included in the Windows installer for Ruby. Some of the other >> books, such as the "Ruby Developer's Guide", focus more on contributed >> modules for GUI development, database access, XML and web services. > >Not to sound rude, but as i stated in my first post "Please take into >considera tion my co-workers and I do know how to use >google and ri, we have found all the documentation and articles that are >out there on Ruby." We have read through the Documentation and online >books you refer to in this post, we also know about the dead-tree books that >are out there on Ruby. I am sharing our overall point of view with >the community after having done some thorough research. It's an opinion >and we all know what opinions are comparable to, so take it or leave it. > OK, so what kinds of topics should future Ruby books (of either the dead-tree or online variety) cover that are not covered (or only superficially covered) in current Ruby books? I can think of a few topics that might make good articles or perhaps chapters in a book: * Ruby and SWIG (although this is covered somewhat in the Ruby Developer's Guide it would be nice to have a more in-depth treatment) * REXML (perhaps a whole Ruby and XML book would be in order, I believe Perl and Python both have similar books) I'm sure there are others, what else? >> Most, if not all, of Ruby's built-in modules are documented in >> "Programming Ruby". <snip> > >> is it that is changing between the currently-available Perl 5.x and Perl >> 6 that will suddenly nullify the things that have drawn large numbers of >> "converts" from the Perl and Python camps? >Every person that i know of who "converted" to ruby has since long converted >back to using python as their main language due to the documentation issue, >and i have quite a few online friends i have kept in contact with for quite some >years that did this. And i find most people that i know do like perl but >they use python for the more clean/realistic OO. I think that rather than >read through my original post and look at what you can pick apart about >it, it might be a good idea to just try and see where i might be coming >from. Judging from your reply to my original post, it seems you assume >i'm just some newbie who has been looking at ruby for a few days and >didnt put much effort in finding what online documentation is actually >available for ruby (even though i stated the opposite in my original post). So again, could you give us some _specific_ examples of actual documentation you would like to see for Ruby that doesn't currently exist? This could help us prioritize. I've done a good bit of Ruby programming in the last couple of years and I've seen the documentation situation improve greatly during that time, however I'm sure there is still room for improvement. Also, please consider this newsgroup as a source of information as well - you'll find that answers come pretty quickly here. Phil