[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> Are you telling us you learned C#, smalltalk, lisp, C, perl, > >> whatever, from 1 website only, without looking at any books, without > >> spending any money on IDEs or any software? Cause that's what you're > >> asking here. > > rurpy> For perl and C, yes, that's (close to) what I'm telling you. > rurpy> Perl I learned exclusively from the man pages, before WWW. I > rurpy> used it for 10 years before I ever bought a printed book. C I > rurpy> learned exclusively from the K&R book. > > That's about the same for me, except Perl never "stuck". > > rurpy> I tried to learn Python from the "official" docs but found it > rurpy> impossible. > > I did as well, though the docs as they existed in 1993 or so (that is > pre-Lutz, pre-Beasley). > > > rurpy> I bought Beasley's book (I think this may have predated > rurpy> Martelli's book but I don't remember) which I thought quite good > rurpy> and which I still turn to before the Python docs in most cases. > > Like other free software, you can choose to figure things out yourself (use > the source Luke) or pay someone to help you out. I'm not using this as an > excuse for poor Python docs. > > rurpy> That's a very good list and I will save a copy, thanks. But what > rurpy> does it have to do with Python's documentation? > > I'm sure you could find similar lists for Perl, C, Ruby, Tcl, Java, C++, C#, > etc. Does that mean their documentation stinks? Maybe. Maybe not. It > just means a lot of people have somewhat different ways of tackling the same > problem. > > Skip
Skip: good points orig qvetcher: Well, I won't have time til, maybe early 2007 to debate the meaning of "free software","official docs", is buying K&R buying a book? In the meantime, use the resources, Luke (i think i've been on usenet too long... signing out) -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
