Slashdot Mirror
Build a Database Driven Site -- Quick
Yank starts with the basics of MySQL and PHP installation on Windows, Linux and Mac OS X systems (he notes PHP 4.3 differences as well), and walks the reader through his first PHP script (no, not "Hello World!"). This first chapter is well written, with step-by-step instructions and shell script examples. It will help even a newbie feel comfortable with the process, and encourage him or her to move on to the rest of the book.
Chapter 2 focuses on relational databases and SQL queries. This chapter is not an in-depth study of RDBMs, but rather an extremely brief overview of the concepts involved in order to introduce the reader to command line interaction with MySQL. A simple database is begun that will be used in later chapters.
Basic syntax and commands of PHP are covered in Chapter 3 (statements, variables, operators). There are a lot of simple examples here that clearly demonstrate the elemental concepts of PHP. Yank uses forms, user interaction and control structures (if-else, while loop, for loop) to illustrate some easy methods of data access and user interaction with PHP.
Chapter 4 combines the two previous chapters' concepts into the beginnings of a working data-driven Web site. Yank shows the reader how to use PHP to connect to a sample MySQL joke database ("A man walks into a bar....Ouch."). He introduces sending SQL queries with PHP (mysql_query, delete, insert, update), handling SELECT result sets and inserting data into the sample ijdb (Internet Joke) database.
Chapter 5 is devoted to relational database design, and expands the one-to-one relationship to many-to-one, one-to-many and many-to-many relationships, this chapter teaches the reader how to join data spread between tables into one resultant set. This chapter is not meant to deal comprehensively with the complexities of relational database design. Indeed, the author gives an extremely brief nod to the inherent informality of his approach and references other resources for deeper study. Yank's intention here, as with the entire book, is to use relevant real-world examples to illustrate the simpler types of relationships a beginner will experiment with and how to deal with complex data and table issues with good design practice.
The next chapter presents content management and restricted-access database administration without relying on the command line (a few hints on protecting pages with appropriate access restrictions are in the introduction to this chapter but aren't dealt with in any depth until Chapter 12). Chapter 4's mention of forms is revisited here, and forms are used to manage, add, search for, edit and delete data.
At this point, the reader will have designed a database, organized the data into categories, created Web pages to display the data to site visitors, and prepared pages for administration of the data. The HTML is separate from the data, thereby relieving the Webmaster from the onerous and constant task of having to refresh pages with content. Here, in Chapter 7, the reader learns to format and submit content without resorting to hand-written HTML by using PHP functions (Yank covers the more standardized POSIX regular expressions, not PCRE). Code examples for string replacement, boldface and italic text, paragraphs, hyperlinks and splitting text into pages are included. The last bit of this chapter is dedicated to automatic content submission and has a nice design note about creating a visible column to the joke table where newly submitted jokes are handled as a No value, which allows review by a content manager before being posted.
This leads well into Chapter 8, "MySQL Administration (backing up, access control, checking and repairing data files)." Yank explains mysqldump and the use of update logs to create a practical backup-management scheme. He also covers using the myisamchk utility to check and repair MySQL data files. Basic MySQL access control using GRANT (creates new users, assigns passwords and adds user privileges) and REVOKE (the reverse of those functions) is included in this chapter as well, along with some tips and tricks to prevent access control problems.
Chapter 9 "gets back to the fun stuff" with Advanced SQL Queries (sorting and GROUPing SELECT results, setting LIMITs, LOCKing TABLES, aliases, LEFT JOINs and Limiting results with HAVING) giving the reader a well rounded sense of the versatility and scope of SQL in general and the SELECT command in particular.
Yank veers from textual data in Chapter 10, "Binary Data" (image files, encryption keys, programs for download) and shows the reader how to deal with working with files in PHP, handling uploaded files in PHP, storing and retrieving binary data in MySQL and learning when to use semi-dynamic pages to lighten the load on server performance in the process.
Chapter 11 deals with creating persistent variables, and offers an excellent description of cookies and sessions in PHP. I like Yank's figure "the life cycle of a cookie," which shows a graphical representation of a PHP-generated cookie. Yank rounds out the chapter with a simple shopping-cart example that consists of PHP scripts handling a product catalog and a checkout page (very real world).
The final chapter of the book is titled "Structured PHP Programming," and focuses on techniques for organizing code in order to simplify management (using include files, writing your own functions and streamlining code within Web pages). Yank gives a lot of sensible advice here, and his approach is not preachy. He brings up many important pitfalls that developers fall into: too much code, difficulty of finding what you need, understanding how it works. As this is a beginner's book, I would say that good design, good technique and good sense go a long way and should be stressed at the start of anyone's career in coding.
Build Your Own Database Driven Website Using PHP & MySQL, 3rd Edition runs only about 350 pages with a clean, easy-to-read page design, comfortable typography, lots of script boxes and screen shots. The appendices cover MySQL syntax, functions and column types and PHP functions for working with MySQL. Errata can be found at sitepoint's Web site, and I can't stress enough the value of checking these out before delving into any technical or instructional book: the frustration level goes way down if you know in advance that there's a typo, or a step missing!
This is a beginner's book with the essential tools and techniques that will get anyone started with serving up their first dynamic Web site. The tutorial approach of this book makes it easy for any reader to follow the step by step instructions. Yank manages to cover pretty much every topic necessary to provide the reader with a clean overview of the topic. It's a quick read and gives the reader encouragement and enough knowledge to move on to more complex volumes on the subject. This book provides a great first step for the beginner."
You can purchase Build Your Own Database Driven Website Using PHP & MySQL from bn.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.
It's like boiling water these days.
Apparently a much needed book!
A summary is NOT a review.
If you really want to set up a quick database site then you may as well use SQLlite that comes bundled in PHP5. No need to worry about connecting to a separate mySQL server with all those niggling connections
And really, if you don't already have an understanding of basic DB design (tables, fields, records, data types, etc.) are you really going to be designing such a site? If you didn't, there are plenty of free resources on the web to help you do that.
Programming is primarily a self-starter job. You learn by doing, and by using free resources out there on the web. Why pay money for a book that regurgitates already free information for two pieces of free software.
As the title suggests. Nothing about PHP templating technology (like Smarty) which can lead to some pretty gnarly PHP code. I'd recommend following this book up with Advanced PHP Programming by George Schlossnagle as it focuses more on PHP.
Shouldn't that be "Quickly", or are we allowed to modify verbs with adjectives on Slashdot?
"Today's Database was Driven by the Letter S and the Number 5"
I wish these books would include a section or two on properly coding web apps and sites. Often people who begin coding with weakly typed languages such as PHP (not a knock against it) do not become familiar with proper design and memory management.
I'm always amazed when books claim 'quick' web development with MySQL and PHP. I think the planning of data structures alone makes this a not quick process. With like a gazillion pre-made CMS's available for demo at OpenSourceCMS (http://www.opensourcecms.com/) wouldn't that be the 'quick' way to go?
T.J. Schmitz - the man, the myth, the legend - o
I guess they ran into the 46 character bug, wh
You have a constitutionally protected right to be wrong, and I the right to ignore you.
I learned PHP using Kevin Yanks tutorials and articles 4 years ago. His books and tutorials are very easy to understand and use. His tutorials and articles can be read on http://sitepoint.com/
Free Web based FTP
Remember the good old days when the /. mods would at least check the headlines before posting stories?
No
I recently threw together a rather Slashdot'ish site (http://www.omninerd.com/) and I used XML text files with PHP (and XSLT) over the mySQL alternative. Now, I'm no DB expert, but is there really any need for most sites to be DB driven? For example, on my site, there are articles, and the news posts that introduce these articles that readers can comment on. Perhaps I'm missing the big picture, but why would I need a DB solution when XML files get the job done, are easily portable, and can be accessed without the use of a DB program. I understand for extremely large data sets a DB is probably what you want, but what about small timers like me? Is a DB solution a waste of my time, or am I missing something big?
Mark A. McBride -- OmniNerd.com
In the early 90's many companies were working hard on data-centric products that took the grunt-work out of typical "CRUD" screens ("Create, Read, Update, Delete"). The leaders were probably PowerBuilder and Clarion, with VB and MS-Access barrowing some of the concepts to a more limited extent.
The Web seemed to ruin this trend. CRUD screens via web forms is a pain in the glutious. Web standards were optimized for e-brochures, not business forms. Frameworks exist, but I have not found any that scale well in customization: if you need something outside of the framework, you are hosed.
I wish the OSS community would work on producing more CRUD tools. If we have to toss HTML+DOM+JavaScript to get it, so be it. I think a remote-GUI protocol workable over HTTP is possible.
Business development is so much smoother if you have good CRUD tools. Otherwise you spend all day reinventing the wheel and dealing with low-level annoyances. I know many slashdotters don't like dealing with CRUD issues, finding it boring or feel it lacks geek status or whatever, but there is a big business need for it. I am kind of a connoisseur of CRUD technologies (for good or bad), and the current wine is bitter.
Table-ized A.I.
The review didn't touch on security. I think that when you're trying to teach beginners and/or non-programmers how to build web applications, a good foundation on computer security principles is a necessity.
Basic things like input validation and protecting against XSS are a MUST when dealing with PHP (or any language for that matter). Since beginners are the ones most likely to make these mistakes, it is important that they be educated now.
1. Buy a book about how to make database-driven websites.
2. Find the sections that tell you how to get it working.
3. Don't read any more about it.
Two words: "SQL Injection."
No flames, please. I never really studied MySQL (other than installing, configuring, fiddling with Wordpress DBs, etc.), since my scholarship's teacher is a fan of PostGreSQL and I learned it first. Now I'm curious about why MySQL is so popular. Everytime someone is talking about a database-driven website it's Perl+MySQL, PHP+MySQL, Ruby+MySQL. What distinctive characteristics does it have over PostGres? Is it faster? Why do you like it so much?
Someone said to me that it's simpler, but from the little that I tried they seemed to have pretty much the same complexity.
Prescriptive grammar:linguistics
1. Which language you use - be it Perl, php,
whatever - is not important. Know the language you
program in BEFORE you start the project! Almost
all scripting languages have the database interfaces
you need.
2. Encapsulate recurring themes like database
selects, inserts and so on. Knowing your language
helps. Balance abstractness against usability.
3. Use a (at least moderate flexible) template
engine.
Then youre (almost) done.
In the last few years I used PHP and Perl. Both
have their advantages and horrors. PHP is getting
(even) better fast. Perl is quite nice if you know
it good, which could take a little time.
I only used MySQL and SQLite. MySQL with InnoDB is
very reliable under heavy loads and huge datasets,
but gets rather clumsy to back up and replicate.
SQLite is blazingly fast, but I cannot say anything
about reliability. I wont bet my crown-jewels on
it (yet).
Anyway. Good luck.
Meme of the day: I browse "Disable Sigs: Checked". So should you.
I've seen _dozens_ of live database queries to fill a 'State' dropdown on a website... ...when was the last time we ratified a new state?
I can't help but feel a lot of 'live instant all the time' sites would be a lot more efficient if it was 4 database calls a day, rather than Every Single Time Slashdot Hits Their Site.
"Draco dormiens nunquam titillandus."
"Build a Database Driven Site - With a Skilled Contractor Who Actually Knows What He's Doing"
:)
Just a thought...
"It was hell!" recalls former child.
Connection pools are your friend... and rather hard to use without an app server, which kinda spoils all the fun of writing PHP, the point of which is generally being able to avoid having to use one in the first place.
Unless you have a limitless supply of CPUs+RAM, you're going to need connection pooling very, very quickly. Frankly, they're so easy to use, I don't understand why anyone would bother coding a database app without them.
But, for a beginner, this seems to cover some of the more important structural aspects of RDBMS in relation to webapps, not just "look, ma, it's dynamic!" Most of the books out there I've seen seem to just assume you know what you're doing on the SQL side of things and just focus on the PHP/JSP/Whatever side of things, which is just a death sentence for a beginner who has never touched a SQL server...
And teach people how to abstract connection information in a separate page.
A whole bunch of items are about to break beacuse people need to use mysqli. It would have been nicer if all these hacks used some db abstraction layer.
And anyone who has had to update some pages a newbie built, will say please learn to abstract the connection information into a single page, not one connection per page.
Ayeee.
Is something analogous to Web Forms. It'd be a great way to encourage people to work towards XHTML compliance if they could write some really slick UI with PHP and "PHP Web Forms" that could be manipulated directly from PHP rather than processed as a regular HTML form.
Then again, I suppose working namespace support is probably a more pressing concern at this point.
Click here or a puppy gets stomped!
I'll bite. Mysql installs & runs on Windows without any third party software. (Yes, the Web really runs on Linux. I know, I know.) PostGreSQL seems to run on Windows only in emulation (via Cygwin). Also, there used to be very slight performance differences (in terms of maximum numbers of hits to the DBMS per second, on simple benchmark datasets), and people seem to enjoy the idea that someone the same box could take 20,000+ hits in an hour using Mysql rather than 19,000 on the same hardware using PostGreSQL. This was a couple years ago so could be completely wrong now. I think there might also be a perception that MySQL is easier to use than PostGreSQL (based, I think, on pronunciation of the name). Plus, Slashdot uses MySQL. Those are the reasons I can think of. YMMV.
We must drive a sword through any hypothesis that is not strictly necessary.
mySQL is popular now because every hosting firm offers it as an option, but Postgres is far less common.
Further, most web service add-ons (CMS, forums, etc.) are mySQL based out-of-the-box so it has become the platform on which to build.
You'll notice there are no technical reasons there - as RDBMS go, mySQL is pretty horrible. It's the Windows of free databases, as it were.
Coming from some work in PHP, I've been burying my head in Ruby lately, to much joy, and have also discovered Ruby on Rails, which was also featured in a recent Slashdot article. What I've seen is amazing so far (not to mention that Ruby code is so much more readable than PHP that it's not even funny). Just an FYI...
Mysql installs & runs on Windows without any third party software. (Yes, the Web really runs on Linux. I know, I know.) PostGreSQL seems to run on Windows only in emulation (via Cygwin).
This is no longer true! PostgreSQL 8.0 was recently released and one of the main feature enhancements is a Win32 Native Server
Find a web host online that has PHP, MySQL and will autointall scripts for you. One such good one is http://secure.lunarpages.com/tracking/cgi-bin/clic kthru.cgi?id=mnewbe2
Purchase Webspace
Login and click the Mambo installer button.
Done - You Now have a PHP/ MYSQL Web Site
Or you can just install Mambo yourself http://mamboserver.com/
That is my suggestion for a QUICK way to do it.
mnewberg.com
I suppose they're archaic now.
The publisher is offering 4-sample chapters in PDF Format for this book on their Website: SitePoint.com/books/phpmysql1/ - It's definitely more useful in helping me make a decision than reading through a Table of Contents or Index, at least for me.
i think it's mainly tradition. mysql was fast, stable, and usable for basic sites long before postgresql. mysql gained a lot of mindshare early on, when they were the only free game in town (as far as most people knew anyway). while postgresql was focused on correctness first, and speed and ease of use only later, mysql was fast and simple to get working almost from the start, and most people didn't know or care why they wanted ACID in a database. now, some six years later, postgresql is mostly a match for mysql in speed, and mysql has added a lot of the 'real' database features that they were criticized for not having early on (although some of us will still not forget their attitude towards implementing them). there's not nearly as much reason to choose one over the other anymore as there used to be, but mysql had the advantage of early mindshare, so all of the websites talk about LAMP, and all of the books talk about "how to do X with mysql".
personally i would never use mysql for data that i didn't want to risk losing, although i have no doubt that it has improved substantially since the last time i had the pleasure of using it. but that's just me.
If I don't put anything here, will anyone recognize me anymore?
personally i would never use mysql for data that i didn't want to risk losing
I hear that a lot without much to say beyond it. But it seems like everytime MySQL and pgSQL come up it's hard to wade through all the zealotry and bs to find any real answers. What exactly do you (and presumably others) base your lack of trust in MySQL's data storage on? I've seen a few personal accounts about how MySQL has f'ed up and lost people's data, but do you know what kinds of things lead up to that? Or, why it would be more likely under MySQL than any other database?
It's more fun to tear your hair out trying to figure out what went wrong! :-P
Galen
In your face, and always right!
This was a couple years ago so could be completely wrong now.
.org domain relies on the PgSQL platform for example.
No completely wrong, but mostly:
* The current release of PgSQL runs natively on NT/2K/XP/2K3 Server as a service. The Cygwin emulation and related kludges are not an issue with either database now.
* PgSQL has been quite optimised in recent years, while at the same time MySQL has become rather less lightweight than it used to be. The only way to get any measurable performance benefit from MySQL over PgSQL now is to forego the use of InnoDB tables in MySQL (and the transactional ACID-compliancy/rollback capability that comes with them). Even then, it is only fast at SELECTs--speed of INSERTs, UPDATEs and DELETEs was never MySQLs real strom point in any case.
* As far as volume of hits and concurrent users go, PostgreSQL is far superior because it has a mature, stable MVCC (multi-version concurrency control) solution that almost completely eliminates table and record locking. If you have a site that does frequent and random insertion, deletion and modification transactions PgSQL wins.
* MySQL was perhaps simpler in the past, but that was because it's capabilities were much more limited. It isn't hard to use today, but it isn't exeptionally easy anymore. Furthermore, PgSQL has a lot more tools to ease administration tasks than it used to. I am puzzled by comments that PgSQL us hard to use--I actually find it is easier to use than MS SQL Server 2000 now. The documentation has come a very long way and you can point-and-click your way around PgSQL with PgAdmin, WebMin, and various PHP web-based tools.
* There are a lot of large-scale PgSQL implementations that rival or exceed Slashdot in scale. The entire
Anyways, I hope I haven't offended MySQL fans--it is a fine product and has enjoyed a great deal of success and advancement with its association with SAP for example. For a typical blogger/slashdot-style site MySQL fits the bill nicely as it has the largest installed base, doesn't handle mission-critical data, and the vast majority of activity is read-only.
If the data in the application is *important* and is write-heavy then you'll find that the case is different than above. For mission-critical web-based systems PostgreSQL tends to be be chosen over MySQL. For example, the SQL-Ledger accounting system uses PgSQL and NOT MySQL. However, MySQL has grown up some and has become a viable option here too--it's just that PgSQL has a more established image as being not the fastest but themost reliable with your data.
Just remember that if you decide to pass on InnoDB to max out performance of your MySQL database you better make damn sure you have a reliable UPS and don't trip on the power cord or bump the emergency power disconnect switch or you'll have a crisis on your hands...
so, now that PHP actually has a complete, functional, and, most importantly, built in database abstraction layer, why are they still teaching people to use mysql_connect/query/etc?
shouldn't everyone be using PEAR::DB by now?
bad news when you decide you want to change your database because mysql can't handle the load without munging your data anymore....
(ok, so the jab at mysql was flamebait, but the rest is a serious question....)
If I don't put anything here, will anyone recognize me anymore?
Lately I have been tasked with helping our communications department get on track with creation of a data driven website. At the moment, we're talking about helping two people. One is a graphic designer who manages a fairly large website. She has done a little bit of asp/access, but I don't think she understands it particularly well. She says she did a little php a long time ago. The other individual has been maintaining a filemaker database which presently contains data that is not in an optimal format for programming. This second individual has, using filemaker, managed to generate static pages off of the data (using some rather scary techniques). While they both have probably seen or written a few sql statements, I doubt they understood what they were doing.
// declaration // gets the student with pri key=2 // print's student's name. // commits name change
I am on loan to this department, so I can't just finish the project in a weekend and then hand it to them. Rather it's going to be a fairly long drawn out educational process (~2 months @ 1/2 time). They need to be able to understand how it works, how to maintain it, how to enhance it. Essentially they need to be an integral/invested part of the development process.
Anyways, my initial idea was to have them use PHP alongside Pear's DB_DataObject and eventually Html_QuickForm libraries. For those not in the know, DB_DataObject is an object oriented data access layer generator framework thingy. Basically, instead of establishing connections, writing sql statements, and iterating over recordsets, they can write fairly simple code like the following.
require_once('some-config-file.php');
$student = new DB_Student();
$student->get(2);
print $student->name;
$student->name = "Bob Bobertson"; set students name.
$student->update();
Now when I see a newbie book teaching people to pound out their own sql and use old school mysql_connect style functions, I question my judgement. Is it a good idea or a bad idea to try to introduce these kinds of rapid development tools to novices? On one hand, these tools make my life easier on a daily basis. On the other hand, sometimes it's better to know the basics before going off to advanced topics like this. What do you guys think?
It should be noted that whatever happens we are not sticking with filemaker (not even my decision). We will either be using Access which doesn't appear to be supported by DB_DataObject or potentially Access/ADP/MSDE or Access/Linked/MySQL which both do work with DB_DataObject. I am desperately trying to set up something that lets them create/edit/drop tables from within Access and lets them easily design queries in access which are then usable with DB_DataObject.
Thus far, the closest I've come is using MSDE (light weight MS SQL Server) as the backend for Access. This is done using the Active Data Project (ADP) format not with linked tables. They can create/edit/drop tables and create views in Access. The views and tables are all reachable via DB_DataObject. However, there is no expression builder in the Access interface when working in this fashion.
This is problematic because these folks are more accustomed to using wizards to dump all of their messed up logic right into their database software. I can see them wanting to create numerous complicated views but not knowing how unless they learn a sizable chunk of TSQL. If they have to do that, the value of a library like DB_DataObject, which prevents them from having to write sql, is significantly reduced.
Personally, I think it all comes down to which they want to be easier: creating access forms/queries/etc or creating data driven web pages. Any thoughts?
First of all, this book seems like a nice rewrite of on-line documentation. It is even a good idea in principle, because building a database driven site with PHP and MySQL is indeed very quick, almost as quick as using Perl and SQLite, but as with every RDBMS there are gotchas. It is true for MySQL, true for PostgreSQL, true for SQLite and even for Oracle, because just like no system is secure, no database is perfect. You always have to know the gotchas to work around them, which is especially important when you want to write a portable database-independent application, which is always a good idea. Unfortunately, this book lacks many important informations about those issues, as it also lacks essential introduction to relational algebra, set theory and predicate calculus, which are important to understand the relational model and to know what the relational database is all about. Without such background, people tend to confuse the relational model with a SQL interface to the filesystem, or an object store, so the lack of such an introduction is the most important flaw of that book. Other than that, it is quite a nice rewrite of many HOWTOs available on-line, and it is always easier and quicker to read one book than to hunt countless websites. All in all, a nice book.
Sincerely,
Pan Tarhei Hosé, PhD.
"Homo sum et cogito ergo odi profanum vulgus et libido."
I guess it might be worth mentioning that when I built my first MySQL/PHP site, I used ADOdb. ADOdb is pretty slick! This is comming from a person who:
.. examples can really clarify things as well!
1. Never programed in PHP! (Hell, never programed in ANYTHING before)
2. Never did ANYTHING database related before!
An all-general newbie to this kind of stuff. In one day, I learned how to create tables, insert data, display data on web pages, and all of the other basic stuff! At least a must-check-out for beginers! Ohh yeah, and "use the force, read the source"
PS - Must Explain why I still have a girlfriend!
Fully dynamic websites will crush your server.
Dynamic websites may be easy for beginners with this book, but introduce (a) a large amount of data or (b) a large amount of traffic (e.g. slashdot effect), and your server will fall over faster than a debutante in her first set of heels.
I was on the team that helped set up cnn.com, back in the "early days" of the Web. And more recently, during the U.S. presidential debates, I convinced FactCheck.org that their server would stop falling over, if they just exported their article database as static HTML files, rather than being 100% dynamic. (that indeed fixed the problem)
Dynamic content has its place, but too many newbies make the assumption that a fully dynamic website is a good idea. For content that does not change frequently, it is often more wise to use triggers to export the data as static HTML than to continually query and generate the same dynamic content over and over again. Database query caches help, but not a whole lot. Static HTML pages, and dynamic pages that provide the HTTP cache/expire/etag info are much more friendly to the web caching infrastructure in your browser and at your ISP.
If anyone is interested in some extra resources for learning PHP, check out my powerpoint slides:
http://www.cs.trinity.edu/~rzinchak/php/
"Many mistakes can be made" with any language. If you think that specifying a particular technology will avoid mistakes, that's fine, but you will always have people who don't know anything about programming but can verifiably claim to know a language and will proceed to develop garbage. I think all of the popular languages for building web-based apps are on the wrong track in that none of them offer data dictionaries or similar workload-reducing features except in the form of third party packages. There is Zope with the CMF, but nobody seems to know how to use it (and the people who do probably had their own frameworks built in their language of choice before they ever saw it). Yes, PHP may be the Visual Basic of the web, but like VB, it is extremely powerful in the hands of a good programmer.
We keep trying to solve problems with different languages when the real problem is with the programmers; they need training, they need to enjoy what they are doing, and they need to be encouraged to be good programmers, not coders in a specific language.
Take a look here
Notice that there are notes. User notes. Those are often more valuable to me than the documentation. No book has those. That is why the online/print it out solution is infinitly better.