From: "M. Edward (Ed) Borasky" <znmeb@...>
Date: 2006-09-22T12:15:53+09:00
Subject: Re: [OT] Rejected Ruby book ideas by O'Reilly

Joel VanderWerf wrote:
> Wilson Bilkovich wrote:
>> On 9/21/06, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky <znmeb@cesmail.net> wrote:
>>> Adelle Hartley wrote:
>>> > When I saw the title of this thread, I was expecting a funny list.
>>> >
>>> > Adelle.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> Yeah, me too ... in fact, I was all set to create a couple ...
>>>
>>> aw shucks ... why not?
>>>
>>> Top Ten Rejected Ruby Book Ideas
>>>
>>> 10. Ruby for Forth Programmers
>>> 9.  Duck Recipes
>>> 8.  The Chunky Bacon Cookbook
>>> 7.  Premature Optimization for Ruby
>>> 6.  Ruby Germs
>>> 5.  Software Engineering Processes -- How to Take the Fun out of Ruby
>>> Programming
>>> 4.  The Sound of One Duck Typing
>>> 3.  Building a Static Web Site With Rails in Three Weeks
>>> 2.  Inside The Commodore 64 Ruby Compiler
>>>
>>> and of course, the number one rejected Ruby book idea:
>>>
>>> 1.  Why Perl, Python, PHP, Java, C#, Pike, Lua, Forth, COBOL, APL, Lisp,
>>> PL/I and Even Macro Assembler are *Way* Better Than Ruby
>>>
>>
>> 11. 'With Wrath Divine': Blogging About Ruby Performance
> 
> If we pool our best ideas, maybe we can win the thinkgeek t-shirt contest.
> 
> http://www.thinkgeek.com/brain/customer_bounty.cgi
> 
> Just think, $250 to donate to rubycentral, and fame everlasting....
> 
Yeah ... I'm in ... the #1 goes on the back or something
you have to be careful to use a number other than 10 -- Letterman has 
some intellectual property rights there. :)