3 ms·

Personally, this is one of the biggest hurdle in making myself to learn/understand coding – how everything fits together. HTML/CSS is easy enough, but I still

Personally, this is one of the biggest hurdle in making myself to learn/understand coding – how everything fits together. HTML/CSS is easy enough, but I still don't understand how Ruby/Rails fit with HTML/CSS in web development/application. I read Rails is a framework coded in Ruby, and they're used for web development/apps – so I look at Ruby and that's where I get lost. Starting from the bottom (learning about arrays and what not, it's hard to stay focused when you don't know what exactly is the benefit and outcome of all this learning and how it fits in web development). I came across a path, or tree skill, that recommends how one should approach web development: HTML > CSS > JS/PHP > JQuery, then once you get that down, it's Ruby > Rails. Hopefully when I look at Ruby/Rails, I won't feel so lost again.

Volscio 15y ago
I was on the same path, and did some Ruby by way of Sinatra for a class I was taking, and now I'm in a course learning Node.js + Express and I'm totally happy.
dclowd9901 15y ago
>you don't know what exactly is the benefit and outcome of all this learning and how it fits in web development This is not your fault; most tutorials and intros are horrifically coded and introduced. You'll often find obscenely arbitrary examples that have literally no place in actual coding. Take for example Backbone.js' introductions. It's an incredibly powerful tool for front end MVC work, but it took me a long time to "get it", because there are literally no examples on their site that pertain to any realistic or practical usage of the framework. To wit: http://documentcloud.github.com/backbone/#Model http://documentcloud.github.com/backbone/#Model They themselves admit that this is a useless example, but choose to use it anyway. It confuses the Model and View purposes, and if it appeared in any actual implementation of Backbone, would break just about every convention in existence. Why even use it? I know they want to avoid telling people how to use it, because it's so open-ended, but it doesn't hurt to establish some common practices or mechanisms. It took me a long time to figure out a good way to link models and views agnostically, simply because they don't address that whatsoever in the docs.
duopixel 15y ago
That looks like a good path, I'd add CoffeeScript after jQuery as it makes a great bridge between JS and Ruby.

Volscio 15y ago

I was on the same path, and did some Ruby by way of Sinatra for a class I was taking, and now I'm in a course learning Node.js + Express and I'm totally happy.

dclowd9901 15y ago

>you don't know what exactly is the benefit and outcome of all this learning and how it fits in web development This is not your fault; most tutorials and intros are horrifically coded and introduced. You'll often find obscenely arbitrary examples that have literally no place in actual coding. Take for example Backbone.js' introductions. It's an incredibly powerful tool for front end MVC work, but it took me a long time to "get it", because there are literally no examples on their site that pertain to any realistic or practical usage of the framework. To wit: http://documentcloud.github.com/backbone/#Model http://documentcloud.github.com/backbone/#Model They themselves admit that this is a useless example, but choose to use it anyway. It confuses the Model and View purposes, and if it appeared in any actual implementation of Backbone, would break just about every convention in existence. Why even use it? I know they want to avoid telling people how to use it, because it's so open-ended, but it doesn't hurt to establish some common practices or mechanisms. It took me a long time to figure out a good way to link models and views agnostically, simply because they don't address that whatsoever in the docs.

duopixel 15y ago

That looks like a good path, I'd add CoffeeScript after jQuery as it makes a great bridge between JS and Ruby.