sdoc VS proposal-built-in-modules

Once you feel comfortable with both Ruby and Rails, try building a few simple apps on your own by reading the Rails Guides and browsing the Rails API whenever you're stuck.

Hi. I'm a self-taught Ruby on Rails programmer. I have a question about the documentation at https://api.rubyonrails.org. On many of the pages, you'll see methods and their details. Below that, you'll often see examples using different options. This is where I have a question. An example might look like this:

If a method isn't documented in https://api.rubyonrails.org/ it shouldn't be used as we reserve the right to remove or change them at any point.

Rails still holds the top spot in getting things out the door in the shortest amount of time. So many example projects and tons of amazing libraries that are available. They absolutely have the best developer docs in the industry as far as I'm concerned.

https://guides.rubyonrails.org/

https://api.rubyonrails.org/

Phoenix/Liveview is a close second. I would personally use Phoenix/Liveview at this point because since I know that stack pretty well, but it is definitely not as easy as Rails to learn. However, once past the learning phase I think there's distinct advantages especially with Liveview.

Fly.io has a free hosting tier currently. You can also get some free servers through Oracle Cloud.

https://api.rubyonrails.org is your best friend. Check the docs before googling. Instant access to the source of functions. ApiDock is shit but continuously gets to the top of google search results.

For something more in-depth, besides the Rails Guides that have been mentioned already, you could also use the Rails API docs as a reference.

Yeah visit guides.rubyonrails.org if you want to see how to do a particular thing like validations and stuff and use this website https://api.rubyonrails.org/ for seeing method definitions their options etc.. These two websites pretty much conver everything. I specially use the second on pretty frequently. Also I think sublime text is better for ruby on rails than vs code but thats personal preference. The ruby doc website is pretty good to for documentation on rubies standard classes. Like if you are looking for some method to do something for a string you can just search string ruby and this comes up first, it contains all public methods for these classes and is pretty useful.

If you mean the Rails API Documentation, I mainly use it when I use a method I'm not familiar with (eg trying to adapt a StackOverflow suggestion).

There is proposal for stdlib, but it will take some time until (if ever) it will reach stage 4.

The working group most in charge of JS is ECMA's TC-39 (TC => Technical Committee) [0]. They've been taking a very deliberate, slow path to expanding the "standard" library because they take a very serious view of backwards compatibility on the web. Some proposals were shifted because of conflicts with ancient versions of things like MooTools still out in the wild, for instance. (This was the so-called "Smooshgate" incident [1].)

This may speed up a bit if the Built-In Modules proposal [2] passes, which would add a deliberate `import` URL for standard modules which would give a cleaner expansion point for new standard libraries over adding more global variables or further expanding the base prototypes (Object.prototype, Array.prototype, etc) in ways that increasingly likely have backwards compatibility issues.

TC-39 works all of their proposals in the open on Github [3] and it can be a fascinating process to watch if you are interested in the language's future direction.

[0] https://tc39.es/

[1] https://developers.google.com/web/updates/2018/03/smooshgate

[2] https://github.com/tc39/proposal-built-in-modules

[3] https://github.com/tc39/proposals

There is a TC39 proposal for a "Javascript Standard Library." It's at stage 1, which is better than stage 0.

https://github.com/tc39/proposal-built-in-modules

The standard library is a tough one. There is a proposal for built-in modules but it is very early days and miles away from what is needed. Clojure ships with functions that make the likes of Lodash and Ramda redundant. I think for a dynamic language an extensive library of functions for manipulating collections is essential. It is a real thing that once dynamic language codebases grow too big, they become a challenge to maintain. Therefore having functions that do a lot of common tasks for you mitigates that issue. Paired with immutability, lots of code just becomes data passing through pipelines, giving less surface area for bugs and making everything more concise and declarative.