From: "David A. Black" <dblack@...>
Date: 2007-03-18T03:04:33+09:00
Subject: Re: attr_accessor

Hi --

On 3/17/07, John Joyce <dangerwillrobinsondanger@gmail.com> wrote:
> Oh, I don't mean to give him credit for that, but for recognizing
> that type of construct and how it is like the ORM stuff in
> ActiveRecord! (unless I'm mistaken) It is a good example of the kinds
> of things Rails developers should probably get familiar with
> conceptually.

Yes, definitely.  The use of standard Ruby idioms as the basis for
things in AR is central, and a very sound move.  When I'm teaching AR,
I usually start with attr_* and all that, on top of which it's easy to
layer the AR stuff, since it's largely just a kind of souped-up,
database-aware expansion of the attribute constructs.

> (I'm working through your book and the Agile book at
> the same time, the different approaches are interesting. Each book
> seems to fill in gaps for the other, so I can't say anyone should
> start with one or the other, but both.)

I'll go along with that :-)


David

-- 
Q. What is THE Ruby book for Rails developers?
A. RUBY FOR RAILS by David A. Black (http://www.manning.com/black)
   (See what readers are saying!  http://www.rubypal.com/r4rrevs.pdf)
Q. Where can I get Ruby/Rails on-site training, consulting, coaching?
A. Ruby Power and Light, LLC (http://www.rubypal.com)