Joshua Collins
5/20/2009 10:53:00 PM
[Note: parts of this message were removed to make it a legal post.]
Thanks Tom, that makes a lot of sense! :-)
On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 6:45 PM, Tom Cloyd <tomcloyd@comcast.net> wrote:
> Joshua Collins wrote:
>
>> What about 'Programming Ruby 1.9: The Pragmatic Programmers' Guide' ?
>>
>> I know they have a 1.8 version of the book as well, but does the 1.9
>> version
>> of the book go over 1.8 and 1.9 both?
>>
>> I also saw a book promoted here on the list called, 'The Well-Grounded
>> Rubyist'. It mainly covers 1.9 as well.
>>
>> Have any of you read these two as well?
>>
>> I will take a look at that O'Reilly's book ... I have not seen that one
>> yet.
>>
>> On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 1:13 PM, Michael J. I. Jackson <
>> mjijackson@gmail.com
>>
>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> If you're looking for a good book that covers both 1.8 and 1.9, I
>>> highly recommend O'Reilly's "The Ruby Programming Language". It's the
>>> most comprehensive and concise reference that I've found, and it
>>> bridges the gap between 1.8 and 1.9 nicely, explaining the differences
>>> between the two as you go.
>>>
>>> Michael
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 9:51 AM, Joshua Collins <kidguko@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> I was wondering the exact same thing!
>>>>
>>>> Before I knew 1.9 was coming out I got a 1.8 book, and I have gone
>>>>
>>>>
>>> through
>>>
>>>
>>>> it. However, I am wondering if I should get a 1.9 book now and learn it.
>>>>
>>>> I have not started any major projects using Ruby just yet, and am
>>>> curious
>>>>
>>>>
>>> if
>>>
>>>
>>>> I should practice with 1.8 some before I learn 1.9 or just jump into 1.9
>>>>
>>>>
>>> and
>>>
>>>
>>>> start using it for projects?
>>>>
>>>> My only concern is the lack of Gem support 1.9 might have right now. Is
>>>>
>>>>
>>> it
>>>
>>>
>>>> something a new comer should worry with? Or, should I just forget the
>>>>
>>>>
>>> lack
>>>
>>>
>>>> of Gem support and know that Gem's will eventually update to 1.9 and new
>>>> Gems will be made for 1.9.
>>>>
>>>> Anyhow, I know that I will want to learn 1.9 at some point. I just do
>>>> not
>>>> want to jump in and be a bad position to progress in my learning because
>>>>
>>>>
>>> of
>>>
>>>
>>>> 1.9 set backs because it is so new.
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 11:45 AM, Hooopo <hoooopo@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> I think ,as a beginnner, to learn Ruby 1.8 is a good way,there are so
>>>>> many lib .
>>>>> and also, if he has learned 1.8 ,then to learn Ruby 1.9 will be easy
>>>>> for him.
>>>>>
>>>>> ps: sorry for my poor English.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
> Another perspective on this: I'm developing a major personal project (into
> my 4th month on it), and have been unable to use 1.9 due to key gems still
> not working in 1.9. However, due to moderate level of Ruby knowledge, I must
> rather often consult a reference. The one I have is Thomas' 3rd edition of
> "Programming Ruby". It focuses on 1.9, but seems to distinctly point out
> where 1.9 is different from 1.8.x.
>
> What I want to emphasize is two things:
>
> 1. depending upon the gems you need, 1.9 may or may not be usable by you.
> For me, it's not yet.
> 2. my principal reference, nevertheless, is a book devoted to 1.9. I have
> yet to get in trouble using this book. Most of the time I don't worry at all
> about version differences, and my code just works (well,
> usually...er...eventually).
>
> So, get a good, up-to-date reference book, and there are several I'd
> personally be happy with, and just start coding. As has been said before on
> this list, many times, the differences between 1.8 and 1.9 are meaningful
> but not earthshaking, at least not to me.
>
> t.
>
> --
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Tom Cloyd, MS MA, LMHC - Private practice Psychotherapist
> Bellingham, Washington, U.S.A: (360) 920-1226
> << tc@tomcloyd.com >> (email)
> << TomCloyd.com >> (website) << sleightmind.wordpress.com >> (mental
> health weblog)
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
>
>