Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #9804 > unrolled thread

JavaScript Book Recommendations?

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.javascript

Contents

  JavaScript Book Recommendations? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-12-30 11:49 -0800
    Re: JavaScript Book Recommendations? "Mel Smith" <med_cutout_syntel@aol.com> - 2011-12-30 13:18 -0700
      Re: JavaScript Book Recommendations? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-12-30 13:45 -0800
      Re: JavaScript Book Recommendations? Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2011-12-30 22:43 +0000
    Re: JavaScript Book Recommendations? "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> - 2011-12-30 22:25 +0200
      Re: JavaScript Book Recommendations? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-12-30 13:52 -0800
        Re: JavaScript Book Recommendations? "Evertjan." <exjxw.hannivoort@interxnl.net> - 2011-12-30 23:28 +0000
          Re: JavaScript Book Recommendations? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-12-31 23:47 -0800
            Re: JavaScript Book Recommendations? "Evertjan." <exjxw.hannivoort@interxnl.net> - 2012-01-01 13:11 +0000
              Re: JavaScript Book Recommendations? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-01-02 10:54 -0800
                Re: JavaScript Book Recommendations? "Evertjan." <exjxw.hannivoort@interxnl.net> - 2012-01-02 23:31 +0000
                  Re: JavaScript Book Recommendations? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-01-02 17:10 -0800
                    Re: JavaScript Book Recommendations? "Evertjan." <exjxw.hannivoort@interxnl.net> - 2012-01-03 11:17 +0000
                      Re: JavaScript Book Recommendations? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-01-03 12:26 -0800
        Re: JavaScript Book Recommendations? Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2012-01-02 09:50 -0800
      Re: JavaScript Book Recommendations? John G Harris <john@nospam.demon.co.uk> - 2012-01-01 16:15 +0000
    Re: JavaScript Book Recommendations? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2011-12-30 12:38 -0800
      Re: JavaScript Book Recommendations? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-12-30 13:57 -0800
    Re: JavaScript Book Recommendations? Dr J R Stockton <reply1152@merlyn.demon.co.uk> - 2011-12-31 21:01 +0000
      Re: JavaScript Book Recommendations? Dr J R Stockton <reply1201@merlyn.demon.co.uk> - 2012-01-03 10:28 +0000
    Re: JavaScript Book Recommendations? John G Harris <john@nospam.demon.co.uk> - 2012-01-01 15:58 +0000
      Re: JavaScript Book Recommendations? Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2012-01-01 17:14 +0000
        Re: JavaScript Book Recommendations? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-01-02 10:59 -0800
          Re: JavaScript Book Recommendations? Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2012-01-02 19:07 +0000
            Re: JavaScript Book Recommendations? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-01-02 12:10 -0800
        Re: JavaScript Book Recommendations? Dr J R Stockton <reply1152@merlyn.demon.co.uk> - 2012-01-02 20:08 +0000
        Re: JavaScript Book Recommendations? Dr J R Stockton <reply1201@merlyn.demon.co.uk> - 2012-01-03 20:44 +0000
          Re: JavaScript Book Recommendations? Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2012-01-04 12:32 +0000
            Re: JavaScript Book Recommendations? "Mel Smith" <med_cutout_syntel@aol.com> - 2012-01-04 09:15 -0700
            Re: JavaScript Book Recommendations? Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-01-04 10:44 -0800
    Re: JavaScript Book Recommendations? williamc <temp4@williamc.com> - 2012-01-02 15:18 -0500
    Re: JavaScript Book Recommendations? "M. Strobel" <sorry_no_mail_here@nowhere.dee> - 2012-01-06 00:58 +0100
      Re: JavaScript Book Recommendations? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-01-06 03:16 +0100
        Re: JavaScript Book Recommendations? "M. Strobel" <sorry_no_mail_here@nowhere.dee> - 2012-01-06 12:06 +0100
          Re: JavaScript Book Recommendations? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2012-01-06 21:05 +0100
          Re: JavaScript Book Recommendations? "M. Strobel" <sorry_no_mail_here@nowhere.dee> - 2012-01-09 13:54 +0100
          Re: JavaScript Book Recommendations? Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2012-01-11 15:59 +0100

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#9843

On Fri, 30 Dec 2011 at 11:49:29, in comp.lang.javascript, Gene Wirchenko
wrote:

  <snip>
>     I am looking for a book that gets into the fine points.  There
>are all too many books and Webpages that deal with the beginning
>stuff, but I need to get into the fine points.
  <snip>

Your best bet is to learn to look up details in ECMA 262 and the W3C DOM
specs.

I'd add learn to look up details in the Microsoft and Mozilla web sites,
but a quick look shows an amazing and discouraging amount of nonsense in
both, and also missing information. This may be why detailed text books
are hard to find : no-one can find out what they really do.

  John
-- 
John Harris

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9845

In article 
<UPXzVMCOKIAPFwEF@J.A830F0FF37FB96852AD08924D9443D28E23ED5CD>,
 John G Harris <john@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:

> On Fri, 30 Dec 2011 at 11:49:29, in comp.lang.javascript, Gene Wirchenko
> wrote:
> 
>   <snip>
> >     I am looking for a book that gets into the fine points.  There
> >are all too many books and Webpages that deal with the beginning
> >stuff, but I need to get into the fine points.
>   <snip>
> 
> Your best bet is to learn to look up details in ECMA 262 and the W3C DOM
> specs.

I haven't looked there but my guess would be that, like all specs, they 
are formally correct but lack readability and have few examples.

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9869

On Sun, 01 Jan 2012 17:14:39 +0000, Tim Streater
<timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:

>In article 
><UPXzVMCOKIAPFwEF@J.A830F0FF37FB96852AD08924D9443D28E23ED5CD>,
> John G Harris <john@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 30 Dec 2011 at 11:49:29, in comp.lang.javascript, Gene Wirchenko
>> wrote:
>> 
>>   <snip>
>> >     I am looking for a book that gets into the fine points.  There
>> >are all too many books and Webpages that deal with the beginning
>> >stuff, but I need to get into the fine points.
>>   <snip>
>> 
>> Your best bet is to learn to look up details in ECMA 262 and the W3C DOM
>> specs.
>
>I haven't looked there but my guess would be that, like all specs, they 
>are formally correct but lack readability and have few examples.

     I was going to write something like that, but I decided to read
your response first.  You nailed it.

     I did try reading the spec.  I got a fair bit through it, but
yes, the readability was not high, examples were rare, and most
importantly, the why was missing.  (The why is why one would use a
given facility.)  A spec is rather tactical; I need something
strategic, too.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9870

In article <sev3g7dfgd9scfb7uc0jmhrnjbf7a16n8i@4ax.com>,
 Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> wrote:

> On Sun, 01 Jan 2012 17:14:39 +0000, Tim Streater
> <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
> 
> >In article 
> ><UPXzVMCOKIAPFwEF@J.A830F0FF37FB96852AD08924D9443D28E23ED5CD>,
> > John G Harris <john@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, 30 Dec 2011 at 11:49:29, in comp.lang.javascript, Gene Wirchenko
> >> wrote:
> >> 
> >>   <snip>
> >> >     I am looking for a book that gets into the fine points.  There
> >> >are all too many books and Webpages that deal with the beginning
> >> >stuff, but I need to get into the fine points.
> >>   <snip>
> >> 
> >> Your best bet is to learn to look up details in ECMA 262 and the W3C DOM
> >> specs.
> >
> >I haven't looked there but my guess would be that, like all specs, they 
> >are formally correct but lack readability and have few examples.
> 
>      I was going to write something like that, but I decided to read
> your response first.  You nailed it.
> 
>      I did try reading the spec.  I got a fair bit through it, but
> yes, the readability was not high, examples were rare, and most
> importantly, the why was missing.  (The why is why one would use a
> given facility.)  A spec is rather tactical; I need something
> strategic, too.

Good analogy. It's why I've been pushing that you get a book or two, I 
wasn't just teasing (well, not much anyway :-)

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9871

On Mon, 02 Jan 2012 19:07:24 +0000, Tim Streater
<timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:

[snip]

>Good analogy. It's why I've been pushing that you get a book or two, I 
>wasn't just teasing (well, not much anyway :-)

     Blame my poor upbringing.  I believe that it is not enough to buy
a book or two, but that they have to be the right books.  <G>

     My observation about there being many beginner books but much
fewer for the next step is, as far as I can see, correct.  I would so
much like it to be wrong.  That would make bookhunting much easier.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9875

In comp.lang.javascript message <timstreater-B1ECC6.17143901012012@news.
individual.net>, Sun, 1 Jan 2012 17:14:39, Tim Streater
<timstreater@greenbee.net> posted:

>In article <UPXzVMCOKIAPFwEF@J.A830F0FF37FB96852AD08924D9443D28E23ED5CD
>>,
>John G Harris <john@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 30 Dec 2011 at 11:49:29, in comp.lang.javascript, Gene Wirchenko
>> wrote:
>>    <snip>
>> >     I am looking for a book that gets into the fine points.  There
>> >are all too many books and Webpages that deal with the beginning
>> >stuff, but I need to get into the fine points.
>>   <snip>
>>  Your best bet is to learn to look up details in ECMA 262 and the W3C
>>DOM
>> specs.
>
>I haven't looked there but my guess would be that, like all specs, they
>are formally correct but lack readability and have few examples.


They are not good for a naive beginner programmer to learn a language
from.  But Gene is not a beginner programmer.

For particular JavaScript points, such as the escapes that GW was asking
about in another thread, one can easily search 262 for appropriate words
and see what is said nearby.

-- 
 (c) John Stockton, nr London, UK.    ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk     Turnpike v6.05.
 Website  <http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - w. FAQish topics, links, acronyms
 PAS EXE etc. : <http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/programs/> - see in 00index.htm
 Dates - miscdate.htm estrdate.htm js-dates.htm pas-time.htm critdate.htm etc.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9897

In comp.lang.javascript message <timstreater-B1ECC6.17143901012012@news.
individual.net>, Sun, 1 Jan 2012 17:14:39, Tim Streater
<timstreater@greenbee.net> posted:

>I haven't looked there but my guess would be that, like all specs, they
>are formally correct but lack readability and have few examples.

The ECMA spec has at least four considerable advantages over books such
as Goodman and Flanagan, and even pocket Flanagan.

It is available in bits - zeroes and ones - at no cost.
It loads onto any reasonable computer.
It is virtually massless.
It is machine-searchable.

Consider an experienced Pascal programmer, at the Gene stage of
JavaScript, whose next bit of code calls for a repeat-until loop in his
Pascal mind.  He can heave his book off the shelf, consult the index,
find no mention of "repeat", wonder if it is indexed in a more general
manner, etc.

Or he can have his PDF of ECMA 262 open, scan for the word "repeat", and
find just two instances of it; clearly each is an "English" rather than
"JavaScript" word.  Likewise "loop".  So there's no repeat-until loop as
such.

But he knows that the Contents List of such a standard will be fairly
reliable - looking down it, he sees the first (and last) interesting
section at "12 Statement", the relevant sub-section at "12.6 Iteration
Statements", and in that sub-sub-sectione 12.6.1 to 12.6.4, with 12.6.1
looking likely.

12.6.1 starts "The production   do Statement while ( Expression );   is
evaluated as follows:", which is probably all that need be said; and,
while the details are not all immediately clear, he should easily see
that there is always at least one iteration, and that 'continue' and
'break', whatever they may be, can be used.

If that's not enough, he at least knows what to look for in a book, or
what to try in a test file.

-- 
 (c) John Stockton, nr London, UK.    ?@merlyn.demon.co.uk     Turnpike v6.05.
 Website  <http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/> - w. FAQish topics, links, acronyms
 PAS EXE etc. : <http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/programs/> - see in 00index.htm
 Dates - miscdate.htm estrdate.htm js-dates.htm pas-time.htm critdate.htm etc.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9911

In article <OHXcIfMni2APFwn$@invalid.uk.co.demon.merlyn.invalid>,
 Dr J R Stockton <reply1201@merlyn.demon.co.uk> wrote:

> In comp.lang.javascript message <timstreater-B1ECC6.17143901012012@news.
> individual.net>, Sun, 1 Jan 2012 17:14:39, Tim Streater
> <timstreater@greenbee.net> posted:
> 
> >I haven't looked there but my guess would be that, like all specs, they
> >are formally correct but lack readability and have few examples.
> 
> The ECMA spec has at least four considerable advantages over books such
> as Goodman and Flanagan, and even pocket Flanagan.
> 
> It is available in bits - zeroes and ones - at no cost.
> It loads onto any reasonable computer.
> It is virtually massless.
> It is machine-searchable.
> 
> Consider an experienced Pascal programmer, at the Gene stage of
> JavaScript, whose next bit of code calls for a repeat-until loop in his
> Pascal mind.  He can heave his book off the shelf, consult the index,
> find no mention of "repeat", wonder if it is indexed in a more general
> manner, etc.
> 
> Or he can have his PDF of ECMA 262 open, scan for the word "repeat", and
> find just two instances of it; clearly each is an "English" rather than
> "JavaScript" word.  Likewise "loop".  So there's no repeat-until loop as
> such.

Or he can look up "loops" in the index of his JS Bible and find a dozen 
references. Or look for "control structures" in the Contents and find 
the appropriate chapter - and then read it through. I don't buy this: 
"Oh dear, no reference to the word 'repeat' so I'm stuck!" business, or 
<innocent look> were you trying to tell us something about Pascal 
programmers?

Having a good index, BTW, is one criterion I'd apply to all technical 
book purchases.

-- 
Tim

"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted"  --  Bill of Rights 1689

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9918

Tim said:

>
> Or he can look up "loops" in the index of his JS Bible and find a dozen 
> references. Or look for "control structures" in the Contents and find the 
> appropriate chapter - and then read it through. I don't buy this: "Oh 
> dear, no reference to the word 'repeat' so I'm stuck!" business, or 
> <innocent look> were you trying to tell us something about Pascal 
> programmers?
>
> Having a good index, BTW, is one criterion I'd apply to all technical book 
> purchases.
>

Hi:

    Tim is right.  I have a complete .pdf copy of the 'Bible' on the CD-ROM 
also, and it is easily searchable. Many reference files on the CD too.

    But, it is still nice to have this 'dictionary-size' book weighing down 
on my legs as I work my way slowly thru it in the evening..

    Lots of good stuff here, but I now realize that I can't recommend the 
book just because *I* like it.  My background, experience, and abilities 
are so much different than most people here that any recommendation that I 
make would be questionable at any level.

    btw, Background:  M.Sc in Computing Science - 1973, University of 
Alberta.  Experience: extensive business programming in a variety of 
languages since then, most recently ten years with Harbour (a high level 
database language that compiles into C).  Abilities: a pretty good business 
programmer, but no abilities at lower levels of programming (i.e., no C or 
Assembler).  Javascript: I've used it at a superficial level for approx a 
year or so, but I really don't know much about what I'm doing yet. I'm still 
dangerous :(

    So, I'll continue with my studying with my head down for a few weeks.

-Mel

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9919

On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 12:32:44 +0000, Tim Streater
<timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:

[snip]

>Having a good index, BTW, is one criterion I'd apply to all technical 
>book purchases.

     Quite, to the point where a technical book not having an index
means I almost certainly will not buy it.

     A good table of contents is something I look for, too.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9872

On 12/30/2011 2:49 PM, Gene Wirchenko wrote:
> Dear JavaScripters:
> 
>      Does anyone have any recommendations for a good book on
> JavaScript?  (If anyone is going to suggest reading the FAQ, let me
> say that you should read it first before hitting "Send".)
> 
>      In another thread, Tim Streater mentioned "JavaScript Bible 7th
> Edition".  What do you think of it?
> 
>      Other titles?
> 
>      I am looking for a book that gets into the fine points.  There
> are all too many books and Webpages that deal with the beginning
> stuff, but I need to get into the fine points.  I want my pages to be
> professional and not subject to errors because some mistake that I
> could have avoided if only I knew.
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> Gene Wirchenko

If you enjoy using a book (as I do), rather than just trying to learn
from the web then for what it's worth, here's what I liked... Luckily, I
was able to check out a lot of books from my local library. Ones I
actually bought after the initial checking out phase are marked with $.

The latest def guide seems pretty good... I bought and read 2-4 back in
the day, and v. 6 seems like a decided improvement. However, when my job
changed and I had an opportunity to try to catch up on web development
progress from 2001-2007 (a lot happened!) I didn't buy the new def
guide. I bought the Zakas book, $JS for Web Developers. I believe a 2nd.
edition is coming out soon. That's also one of the ones
that O'Reilly suggests as a good intro book.

And, I really liked both of the books O'Reilly suggested for
intermediates: JS the Good Parts and $JavaScript Patterns. Getting a lot
out of JS Patterns, which I'm currently re-reading.

Eloquent JS, you can read for free on the web, at least a version of it.
The paper edition may have some value added parts.

Also reading $JS Web Applications (O'Reilly recommended, advanced). It's
somewhat tied to jQuery, but the author usually shows the POJS approach
first, and uses jQ methods as a convenience. It's a book about using MVC
for large-scale web applications. Whether you're sympathetic to his POV
or not, if you're at the stage where you're trying to get to a more
advanced level, you'll probably get something out of it - if only by
being exposed to a different way to do things...

-- 

-williamc

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9941

Am 30.12.2011 20:49, schrieb Gene Wirchenko:
> Dear JavaScripters:
> 
>      Does anyone have any recommendations for a good book on
> JavaScript?  (If anyone is going to suggest reading the FAQ, let me
> say that you should read it first before hitting "Send".)
> 
>      In another thread, Tim Streater mentioned "JavaScript Bible 7th
> Edition".  What do you think of it?
> 
...
>      I am looking for a book that gets into the fine points.  There
> are all too many books and Webpages that deal with the beginning
> stuff, but I need to get into the fine points.  I want my pages to be
> professional and not subject to errors because some mistake that I
> could have avoided if only I knew.
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> Gene Wirchenko

I have got the JavaScript Bible 6th edition since 2008. I think
it is very complete, no problem to get into the fine points.

It is absolutely huge, set with a small font (means a lot of text).

My version is a little outdated on browser subjects.

In my opinion it is overly complete, you have hardly a chance to
work through it all. But the structure and index seem good and
logical to me.

I have seen higher prices on books, just buy it if you need
javascript.

Disclaimer: Javascript is only one of many assets for me.

/Str.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9943

M. Strobel wrote:

> Am 30.12.2011 20:49, schrieb Gene Wirchenko:
>>      I am looking for a book that gets into the fine points.  There
>> are all too many books and Webpages that deal with the beginning
>> stuff, but I need to get into the fine points.  I want my pages to be
>> professional and not subject to errors because some mistake that I
>> could have avoided if only I knew.
> 
> I have got the JavaScript Bible 6th edition since 2008. I think
> it is very complete, no problem to get into the fine points.

Unless it contains errors.

> It is absolutely huge, set with a small font (means a lot of text).
> 
> My version is a little outdated on browser subjects.
> 
> In my opinion it is overly complete, you have hardly a chance to
> work through it all. But the structure and index seem good and
> logical to me.

While you can learn some things from Goodman's 6th ed., there will still be 
a lot of things – I daresay more – that you have to unlearn after you read 
that book (for example, using parseInt() without second argument).  The main 
problem is that the book is quantity over quality and more about the DOM 
(with still a lot of awful examples that were even outdated back in 2007, 
when it was published) than about the programming language.  IOW, target 
missed.

The book is good for Brendan Eich's foreword and the first two background 
chapters.  The third chapter, "Your First JavaScript Script" already has a 
erroneous example, one with an invalid HTML document that uses 
`window.onload' over `<body onload="…">' even though the author has full 
control over the document.  It goes on with using document.getElementById(…) 
in a chain (which is tolerable) and `innerHTML' (which is not) that is 
assigned code so that the resulting `script' element is liable to end 
prematurely (ETAGO delimiters not escaped), rendering the HTML document 
invalid in any case.

It is good that he says "<script> tag", which is correct, but why is there 
no proper explanation of _elements_ in that chapter (no, the `div' element 
has the attribute, not the "<div> tag")?  After all, he is calling 
document.get*Element*ById().

And then he continues with explaining the `navigator' object (for later 
browser sniffing – ouch!).

Not that any of this really has to do with the programming language that the 
book should be about.  And what it is really about is ripe with problems 
like that.

> I have seen higher prices on books, just buy it if you need
> javascript.

A waste of money regardless.  (There is 
<http://books.google.ch/books?id=W3eytUUwhEIC&printsec=frontcover&hl=de&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0> 
with many preview pages.  If you must read it complete, go to a public 
library instead.)

> Disclaimer: Javascript is only one of many assets for me.

There is no "Javascript", and Goodman's distributing the common  
misconception that *current* JScript was only another name for JavaScript 
does not help either.

IMO, the best way to become professional about this is RTFM (and I really 
mean the *manual*, i. e. language specifications and references), and 
posting *relevant* *parts* of your code for public review as explained in 
<http://jibbering.com/faq/#posting>.


PointedEars
-- 
Prototype.js was written by people who don't know javascript for people
who don't know javascript. People who don't know javascript are not
the best source of advice on designing systems that use javascript.
  -- Richard Cornford, cljs, <f806at$ail$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9959

Am 06.01.2012 03:16, schrieb Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn:
> IMO, the best way to become professional about this is RTFM (and I really 
> mean the *manual*, i. e. language specifications and references), and 
> posting *relevant* *parts* of your code for public review as explained in 
> <http://jibbering.com/faq/#posting>.
> 
> 
> PointedEars

We do RTFM all the time. But FMs are not made for teaching, they
are for reference.

Best is a teacher (a real one, in flesh), next best is a good
book. Discussion in a forum/newsgroup is IMO something you do in
any case, and it is only for minor questions.

/Str.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#9991

M. Strobel wrote:

> Am 06.01.2012 03:16, schrieb Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn:
>> IMO, the best way to become professional about this is RTFM (and I really
>> mean the *manual*, i. e. language specifications and references), and
>> posting *relevant* *parts* of your code for public review as explained in
>> <http://jibbering.com/faq/#posting>.
> 
> We do RTFM all the time. But FMs are not made for teaching, they
> are for reference.

NAK.  With proper discipline, you can learn a lot when learning from a good 
manual combined with good discussions.  BTDT.  The Netscape JavaScript 
Guides and References (nowadays MDN), after being corrected in discussions, 
and the ECMAScript Language Specification, after being explained in 
discussions, have been excellent teachers to me.

> Best is a teacher (a real one, in flesh), next best is a good book.

But there is no good book.

> Discussion in a forum/newsgroup is IMO something you do in
> any case, and it is only for minor questions.

NAK.  You cannot have been reading here (or elsewhere) long, for the record 
shows that the most minor questions often cause the longest and most 
interesting discussions on much more than the subject of the original 
question.


PointedEars
-- 
Danny Goodman's books are out of date and teach practices that are
positively harmful for cross-browser scripting.
  -- Richard Cornford, cljs, <cife6q$253$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk> (2004)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10067

Am 06.01.2012 21:04, schrieb Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn:
> M. Strobel wrote:
--cut
>> Best is a teacher (a real one, in flesh), next best is a good book.
> 
> But there is no good book.
--cut
> 
> 
> PointedEars

Ohh. You completely missed something good.

/Str.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#10135

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn, 2012-01-06 21:04:

> M. Strobel wrote:
> 
[...]
>> Best is a teacher (a real one, in flesh), next best is a good book.
> 
> But there is no good book.

Your chance to write one and earn some money by its publishing ;-)



-- 
Arno Welzel
http://arnowelzel.de
http://de-rec-fahrrad.de

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.javascript

csiph-web