[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software
Confronta i prezzi di migliaia di prodotti.
Asp Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

comp.lang.ruby

documentation for ruby?

slix

5/27/2008 7:46:00 AM

i think the documentation at http://www.rub... is fairly
useless.

is there a better one?
62 Answers

Robert Klemme

5/27/2008 9:10:00 AM

0

2008/5/27 <notnorwegian@yahoo.se>:
> i think the documentation at http://www.rub... is fairly
> useless.
>
> is there a better one?

According to what standards?

robert


--
use.inject do |as, often| as.you_can - without end

Marc Heiler

5/27/2008 9:39:00 AM

0

The pickaxe book is probably better overall.
And there is some rails-powered site ... noobkit, which is ok, though
missing some things as well.
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-....

Robert Klemme

5/27/2008 9:45:00 AM

0

2008/5/27 Marc Heiler <shevegen@linuxmail.org>:
> The pickaxe book is probably better overall.

The pickaxe is actually linked from the site the OP mentioned.

robert

--
use.inject do |as, often| as.you_can - without end

Ron Fox

5/27/2008 11:50:00 AM

0

What sort of documentation are you looking for reference? tutorial?
At what level? Beginner, intermediate, expert?


notnorwegian@yahoo.se wrote:
> i think the documentation at http://www.rub... is fairly
> useless.
>
> is there a better one?
>
>

James Bracy

5/27/2008 12:58:00 PM

0

[Note: parts of this message were removed to make it a legal post.]

I find ruby-doc to be great. But if you are looking for a tutorial, it
probably isn't the place to go. It is much better as a reference.

On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 6:54 AM, Ron Fox <fox@nscl.msu.edu> wrote:

> What sort of documentation are you looking for reference? tutorial?
> At what level? Beginner, intermediate, expert?
>
>
>
> notnorwegian@yahoo.se wrote:
>
>> i think the documentation at http://www.rub... is fairly
>> useless.
>>
>> is there a better one?
>>
>>
>>
>

Robert Dober

5/27/2008 2:03:00 PM

0

On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 2:58 PM, James Bracy <waratuman86@gmail.com> wrote:
> I find ruby-doc to be great. But if you are looking for a tutorial, it
> probably isn't the place to go. It is much better as a reference.
Please do not top post this community (as many others) prefer bottom
posting, you can however post in between. In that case your post will
refer to the text above by convention :).

ruby-doc is great I agree, and there are most useful links to widely
accepted books and even tutorials.

Cheers
Robert
--
http://ruby-smalltalk.blo...

---
Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent.
Ludwig Wittgenstein

Mark Wilden

5/27/2008 2:21:00 PM

0

On May 27, 2008, at 7:03 AM, Robert Dober wrote:

> On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 2:58 PM, James Bracy <waratuman86@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> I find ruby-doc to be great. But if you are looking for a tutorial,
>> it
>> probably isn't the place to go. It is much better as a reference.

> Please do not top post this community (as many others) prefer bottom
> posting

Many others don't mind it either way, and if the quote trail is long,
prefer top posting. I don't know where the anti-toppers always seem to
feel that they can speak for everyone else.

///ark

Victor Reyes

5/27/2008 2:36:00 PM

0

[Note: parts of this message were removed to make it a legal post.]

What's top or bottom posting anyway?
I just want to learn the "right" way to post or answer (which I hardly do
since I am a neophyte).

Thanks

Victor

On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 10:20 AM, Mark Wilden <mark@mwilden.com> wrote:

> On May 27, 2008, at 7:03 AM, Robert Dober wrote:
>
> On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 2:58 PM, James Bracy <waratuman86@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I find ruby-doc to be great. But if you are looking for a tutorial, it
>>> probably isn't the place to go. It is much better as a reference.
>>>
>>
> Please do not top post this community (as many others) prefer bottom
>> posting
>>
>
> Many others don't mind it either way, and if the quote trail is long,
> prefer top posting. I don't know where the anti-toppers always seem to feel
> that they can speak for everyone else.
>
> ///ark
>
>

Todd Benson

5/27/2008 2:40:00 PM

0

This is top posting.

On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 9:35 AM, Victor Reyes <victor.reyes@gmail.com> wrote:
> What's top or bottom posting anyway?

This is bottom posting.

> I just want to learn the "right" way to post or answer (which I hardly do
> since I am a neophyte).
>
> Thanks
>
> Victor

This is bottom posting a conclusion.

Bottom posting tends to take on a more natural conversational feel.

Some mail readers work better this way, as well.

hth,
Todd

Tobias Weber

5/27/2008 2:46:00 PM

0

In article <0D16738A-F1A2-4DB9-87E9-FEC81AF636CF@mwilden.com>,
Mark Wilden <mark@mwilden.com> wrote:

> Many others don't mind it either way, and if the quote trail is long,
> prefer top posting. I don't know where the anti-toppers always seem to
> feel that they can speak for everyone else.

In Usenet pro-toppers are extremely rare.

Somewhere I've seen good arguments that inter-quoting is much better for
discussion while full-quoting helps in coporate environments full of
technically barely-literate people CCing their e-mails to everybody.

BTW is this newsgroup bridged with some web forum? There's this strange
Organization: header and those occasional "legale message" notes...

--
Tobias Weber