Foobar: one more insult - joking or not - and we'll be having a problem.foobar wrote:Liar.Sami wrote: A book really is just an elaborate string of tutorials.![]()
hello everyone
Moderator: General Moderators
Whoa there! You seem to be a little too sensitive, don't you? What's wrong with a little joking? Is there something you have against me or what? Please make yourself clear because right now, you have succeeded at completely confusing me. What are you on about?patrikG wrote:Foobar: one more insult - joking or not - and we'll be having a problem.foobar wrote:Liar.Sami wrote: A book really is just an elaborate string of tutorials.![]()
I agree, in a sense (it depends on the book). But the same thing can be said about tutorials (but again, I only agree with that in a sense because it varies and depends on the tutorial).foobar wrote:they get into this whole theorising about the nature of whatever their trying to explain to you instead of just serving the facts & definitions and getting it over with.
Simple: we don't call people liar on this forum.foobar wrote:Whoa there! You seem to be a little too sensitive, don't you? What's wrong with a little joking? Is there something you have against me or what? Please make yourself clear because right now, you have succeeded at completely confusing me. What are you on about?patrikG wrote:Foobar: one more insult - joking or not - and we'll be having a problem.foobar wrote: Liar.![]()
Maybe it's just my bad luck. I often find myself buying books that have received critical acclaim (Wrox books, O'Reilly, and the rest of them) and start out really well, but then there are some chapters where it's just the author trying to be a smartass bragging about how much he knows on a certain topic. It's OK to expand on a topic and everything, but I just can't stand it when they get all revved up about it. Again, that's just my biased opinion. If it were my way, books would be precise to the dot. As I said, I only use books for reference. I have a few books on several programming languages and frameworks, with lots of theory, but I really only use them when I forget some syntactical nuance or need inspiration. I've never read a book like that from cover to cover.Sami wrote:I agree, in a sense (it depends on the book). But the same thing can be said about tutorials (but again, I only agree with that in a sense because it varies and depends on the tutorial).foobar wrote:they get into this whole theorising about the nature of whatever their trying to explain to you instead of just serving the facts & definitions and getting it over with.
I approach tutorials in a similar way, especially if they're geared at people who like to read about a concept to fully grasp it. I'm not that kind of person. That's why I browse the W3C CSS reference with passion.
That's on thing, but it was done in an obviously joking manner, and also it was not regarding anything important or serious. I was just being facetious. It's not like I was insulting Sami, and I don't think he took offense either. If so, I appologise. However, I still do not understand your reaction, patrickG. You honestly puzzled me with that outburst.patrikG wrote:Simple: we don't call people liar on this forum.
Joking or not is irrelevant. People can easily read your posts on this forum in ways you simply did not intend. That's why I'm asking you to refrain from insulting people, jokingly or not. If you're not happy with this reply, send me a PM.foobar wrote:That's on thing, but it was done in an obviously joking manner, and also it was not regarding anything important or serious. I was just being facetious. It's not like I was insulting Sami, and I don't think he took offense either. If so, I appologise. However, I still do not understand your reaction, patrickG. You honestly puzzled me with that outburst.patrikG wrote:Simple: we don't call people liar on this forum.
But wouldn't you agree that expanding on a topic is trying to be precise and give the reader the most understanding about the topic or related topics as possible?foobar wrote:It's OK to expand on a topic and everything, but I just can't stand it when they get all revved up about it.
...
If it were my way, books would be precise to the dot
Being as descriptive and explaining as much as possible is a good thing and it's always better (especially in this case) to have too much of a good thing, instead of the opposite where they'd just touch on a topic and then make multiple references to it. That's confuses the reader and isn't good teaching practices IMO.
And speaking of that, I find that to happen more often in tutorials that I read because of their brief and simplistic nature. Some are good for tossing you a link, but then that goes back to my point about consistency and getting comfortable reading from one or a few authors who use a certain format. If you suddenly need to read an entire different tutorial just to understand something that was referenced in another tutorial, it makes the task of learning less efficient and for some, rather daunting. That's what I've noticed from my experiences.
Books rule. I like the Bible series of books. very thorough.Sami wrote:Welcome to the community.
I'd recommend picking up a basic PHP book to help get you started. There is many good tutorials online, but for a consistent and high quality learning approach to the wide variety of topics you'll need to know, I recommend a book over online tutorials.
Peachpit Press, Wrox, and O'Reilly have some great PHP Books.