[ruby-talk:8965] Re: GULP (working title :-) related thoughts

David Alan Black <[e-mail]> writes:

> I've been very interested particularly in the development of an
> on-line cookbook, as well as the various archive and library ideas
> that have been circulating recently.  And yet, when I've tried to
> really sit down and sketch out how things might work, I've hit a kind
> of impasse.  My latest analysis of this is that what's behind this
> impasse is, of all things, the very power of Ruby.

Great post.

But turn it around. For the cookbook site, as opposed to Gulp, it's
perfectly acceptable to have many version of things, partial snippets,
and the like. In fact, think how valuable it would be to have all this 
discussion about Hash defaults archived, along with all the code
snippets. People could search for 'hash default' and get not just
working code, but an insight into the process that lead to it.

Don't let the fact that many of the snippets will be trivially short
be a deterrent. They're educational, and genuinely useful. In fact,
sometimes the very power of Ruby can obscure a simple solution: having 
all these snippets online and indexed will be invaluable.

Gulp is a different story. There we're aiming for accuracy,
completeness and authority. But we can cross that bridge when we've
worked out exactly what we want.


Regards


Dave