I completely support these ideas.  It seems the book is Massimo's
effort, not a community's effort.  Documentation needs to be a
community effort; look at Django, Drupal.

On Jul 30, 11:03 pm, Bruno Rocha <[email protected]> wrote:
> I completelly agree with Jonathan, I also want to have a deeper explanation
> on DAL backgrounds.
>
> web2py is Agile enough for me and for my development team, but, sometimes we
> spent more time trying to figure out "how to" to some things, and testing
> alternatives than developing real solutions.
>
> The book is very good when we need to solve common and trivial things,
> otherwise when we need to go further. The only solution has been testing,
> looking for examples, using this list, or in many cases reading the source
> code and trying to understand what is happening behind the scenes. It costs
> a great time.
>
> As was mentioned in the "why I hate Django" video, using frameworks you gain
> time in the early stages, but lost much more in that we need to refine and
> tune up applications.
>
> For this reason I support a forum <pyforum.org>, IMHO, until we have a
> broader and deeper documentation, a forum would be much more usable than
> this list, and the DRY concept could be applied more easily to posts in a
> forum, rather than messages in this list.
> Forum can do things like a good search engine, sintax highlighting,
> screenshots embeded in to the context....
> and yet it is possible to create mechanisms for threads to be followed by
> email, and people could start new threads by email as well.  Perhaps using
> markmin syntax to include files, highlight the code, and things ... more
>
> This type of platform could be better used to build further documentation.
>
> why not support and start an official web2py forum?
>
> 2010/7/30 Jonathan Lundell <[email protected]>
>
>
>
> > On Jul 30, 2010, at 7:22 PM, Iceberg wrote:
>
> > > On Jul 31, 1:15 am, Jonathan Lundell <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >> On Jul 30, 2010, at 9:19 AM, VP wrote:
> > >>> On Jul 30, 9:35 am, mdipierro <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >http://gluonframework.wordpress.com/2010/07/30/web2py-and-metaclasses/
>
> > >>> This is really nice.  Please do more of this.
>
> > >> My initial reaction is the opposite. The result might be more readable,
> > but it doesn't strike me as more writable.
>
> > >> What would be most helpful for me would be a deeper explanation (in the
> > book) of what's going on behind the existing DAL "magic" syntax, rather than
> > adding yet another layer of magic.
>
> > > You make a good point, Jonathan. And I think there is a underlying
> > > question here. Which kind of audience is web2py targeting to?  If for
> > > developers, the existing DAL syntax is already powerful and magical
> > > enough (the document is also good, here it is.
> >http://web2py.com/book/default/chapter/06
> > > ). Developers don't need another layer which is more fancy but not
> > > more powerful.
>
> > I'm not satisfied with the treatment in the book. I'd like to see each of
> > the DAL objects more completely described, especially as to the underlying
> > Python types and the operations that they implicitly support. Several of
> > them IIRC are polymorphic wrt their argument types, and you either have to
> > divine this telepathically or read the source in detail. Likewise operator
> > overloading.
>
> > I'm sure it's second nature to Massimo, but for most of us, we have to hunt
> > around for an example that matches our situation, and blindly copy & paste.
> > Either that or experiment until it stops raising exceptions....
>
> --
>
> http://rochacbruno.com.br

Reply via email to