On Thu, 8 Dec 2005 01:32:08 +0100, "Fredrik Lundh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> > wasn't the idea to get rid of the language reference altogether, and
>> > replace it with a better introduction ?
>>
>> Can an introduction provide the information the language
>> reference provides (or maybe I am misunderstanding what
>> you mean by introduction.)
>
>from the post that opened this thread:
>
> "Perhaps we need a friendlier counterpart to the RefGuide, something
> like the 20-page introduction to Python at the beginning of Beazley's
> Essential Reference:
>
> * go over the statements one-by-one
> * go over the basic types and their methods
> * go over object semantics
> * cover some of the lexical material in chapter 2 of the RefGuide
> * overarching principles: go into a fair bit of detail, but
> not every corner case; make the text readable, not meticulously
> precise."
>
I think discussion of python reference materials is not complete without
mentioning the quick-reference at (e.g. for python 2.4)
http://rgruet.free.fr/PQR24/PQR2.4.html
which BTW is accessible from the python.org docs page
(http://www.python.org/doc/)
via the "Quick Reference Guide (off-site)" link to the quikc ref home page
(other goodies too).
http://rgruet.free.fr/#QuickRef
IMO the first link above (or for whatever current version) would be nice to find
on the documentation sidebar of python's home page (http://www.python.org/),
maybe right below the "Beginner's Guide" link.
(it's gotten nicer, so maybe I'll snag me a fresh offline-usable copy, and
update my Start>Help menu ;-)
Regards,
Bengt Richter
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
