Talk:Ruby Programming
Page contents not supported in other languages.
I think this book contains some really useful information, but in its current form it's not all that much fun for a reader to read through this.There are multiple issues that could be improved and make this book into a really good one (and make it fun to read an contribute to):
Table of Contents: One of the first things a possible reader is going to see when encountering this book is the main page with the table of contents. In my eyes however the table of contents is quite big and contains some things that could easily be moved to other pages (for example do we really need a link to every control structure in the table of contents? Alternatively there could be a table of contents of the main topics which is easy to navigate and a list of all default modules, classes, and commands) to improve readibility.
Consistent syntax highlighting: Currently I see multiple ways how code is highlighted. (There's basically inlineswithout borders andsome with borders; code is typically highlighted but with console outputs it's not always clear.) Content wise this isn't a real issue but I think it would do good to the presentation quality of this book. I'm not sure if there's a general style guideline for it already and I'm missing anything out, but what about making sure that everything is in a bordered box so it's clear where the main text stops and the code example starts?
Page completion: I think it would mean a lot if it was easy to spot from the table of contents how finished a given page is. Some pages really could need more work than others do.
Outdated information: Some pages deal with stuff that's not absolutely up to date with newest Ruby versions anymore (eg. old default encoding ascii). Should this be fixed or left as is? Personally I'd like the idea of having a really up to date book that will enable people to use current versions of Ruby.
Ok these are just some things and I didn't finger point at everything but I think it's a good idea to see what could all be done about the book. I'll try to fix some of these things, but I just wanted to know what anyone else thinks about this all and I don't want to accidentally do something that needs to be reverted...
Evotopid (discuss •contribs)18:04, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
I didn't delete anything as of yet, but I'd still be interested in cleaning up at least the table of contents. This book could be pretty good with some more structure and has some interesting pages on more advanced topics. If no one has an argument against it I would like to start removing outdated reference material and improve the structure and quality of the actually relevant chapters. I guess I will leave this here for a week or two before I start doing something.--Evotopid (discuss •contribs)20:27, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
The organization of the new material on strings is a mess. Why the heck is it placed before the section on Basic Ruby? Why are the sections on "Alternate Quotes", "Here Documents", and "ASCII" separate chapters rather than being subsections of the "Strings" chapter?
--OinkOink23:32, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
I wonder if it isn't time to put in some additional structure to the "Getting Started" section. There are really three or four big headings here:
Then the intermediate section is an alacarte of self-contained topics, and the language reference for more details. Yes, I know this structure follows Pickaxe pretty closely.
--Marburg23:24, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
Would those who are working on this project mind putting exercises at the end of sections so that people like myself who are learning the language could practice implementing some programs? Thank you very much for your time, and the tutorial has taught me a lot already.
Sincerely,Eric Scrivner
I once started a tutorial on Ruby. It's right here:
http://www.math.umd.edu/~dcarrera/ruby/0.3/index.html
If any of this content is useful for this Ruby Wikibook feel free to take it. I have alread released the tutorial as GNU FDL, so it should be compatible with this Wikibook. But I'm happy to make it public domain if necessary.
I wish I had time to work on this project, but I'm already leading a large documentation project (oooauthors.org).
Cheers,Daniel Carrera.
You might want to consider theWB:NP. You current naming convention is depreciated and has several disadvantages - like it has no navigational links. Also you worthy effort is neiter considered a book nor a section inside a book. Seewikistats which implements an exstensive book and section detector.
--Krischik T07:15, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
Supriya, the name "Ruby Prog" is inconsistent with other programming books on Wikibooks. For example:
I don't see the reason for the name change. Also, many of the links to the sections broke when you renamed the main page. I'm going to revert.
--Briand00:17, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
I am currently in discussions about Mr Pine giving his documentation [1] into the public domain.If anyone wants to contact him, his email address is the following chris@pine.fm
Yours sincerely,Edward Rein
--Herraotic12:12, 29 October 2006 (UTC)