Want to learn Python

[Amol]

Hi, I want to learn Python in less than a month which resources should
I use. I prefer to read books . Please give me a list of *recognized*
resources. Thank You all

[BartlebyScrivener]

On Jun 15, 6:41 am, Amol <amolj.1...@gma il.comwrote:

Hi, I want to learn Python in less than a month which resources should
I use. I prefer to read books . Please give me a list of *recognized*
resources. Thank You all

Python Essential Reference, David Beazley, 3rd edition Feb 2006
great, esp. if you already know some other programming language

http://www.amazon.com/Python-Essenti...623/inscape-20

rd

[Alex Martelli]

7stud <bb**********@y ahoo.comwrote:
...

The reference book "Python in a Nutshell" is excellent, however its
index is so bad I hesitate to recommend it. A reference book should
have a thorough index--you shouldn't have to hunt through the chapters
trying to find the particular topic you are interested in.

Try <http://books.google.co m/advanced_book_s earch-- it will easily
generate for you queries on books.google.co m such as, e.g.:
generator inauthor:"alex martelli"
to find 3 mentions of "generator" in the Nutshell and Cookbook. Not
quite a replacement for a good index, of course (you're welcome to write
O'Reilly spewing hate on how much you loathe that index - maybe that
will help convince them to put more time and effort into indexing on
their future projects, or offer some way for book authors to add
indexing indications as they write their books), but it still seems
potentially helpful.
Alex

[Aahz]

In article <11************ **********@c77g 2000hse.googleg roups.com>,
7stud <bb**********@y ahoo.comwrote:

>
I am of the opposite opinion: I recommend that people get any book but
"Beginning Python: Novice to Professional". In my opinion, that book
is horribly written, the examples are terrible, some subjects are only
covered in passing so the info is too parse to be of any use, and
there are no problems at the end of the chapters to work on. I think
a beginner might be fooled into thinking Beginning Python is a good
book because they won't know how many holes their knowledge of python
is riddled with, and since there are no problems to work on, they may
not even realize how little they learned. I think an experienced
programmer would spot all the blunders in the book straight away.

I'm curious, have you tried _Python for Dummies_? I don't want to be
shilling my own book -- but I'd also like to know how it stacks up.
--
Aahz (aa**@pythoncra ft.com) <* http://www.pythoncraft.com/

"as long as we like the same operating system, things are cool." --piranha

[Aahz]

In article <1h************ **************@ mac.com>,
Alex Martelli <al***@mac.comw rote:

>7stud <bb**********@y ahoo.comwrote:

>>
The reference book "Python in a Nutshell" is excellent, however its
index is so bad I hesitate to recommend it. A reference book should
have a thorough index--you shouldn't have to hunt through the chapters
trying to find the particular topic you are interested in.

Try <http://books.google.co m/advanced_book_s earch-- it will easily
generate for you queries on books.google.co m such as, e.g.:
generator inauthor:"alex martelli"
to find 3 mentions of "generator" in the Nutshell and Cookbook. Not
quite a replacement for a good index, of course (you're welcome to write
O'Reilly spewing hate on how much you loathe that index - maybe that
will help convince them to put more time and effort into indexing on
their future projects, or offer some way for book authors to add
indexing indications as they write their books), but it still seems
potentially helpful.

We didn't wait for Wiley to offer, we simply insisted on providing a
list of index terms. That's why _Python for Dummies_ includes "genexp"
in addition to "generator" , and also why we have separate entries for
"{} dict literal", "braces ({}) dict literal", and "curly braces ({})
dict literal". ;-)
--
Aahz (aa**@pythoncra ft.com) <* http://www.pythoncraft.com/

"as long as we like the same operating system, things are cool." --piranha

[7stud]

I'm curious, have you tried _Python for Dummies_?

No, I haven't. Unfortunately, I don't ever consider Dummies books.
That type of marketing appeals to certain people and not others. I'm
one of the others. I'll definitely take a look at it the next time
I'm in the bookstore.

>We didn't wait for Wiley to offer, we simply insisted on providing a
list of index terms.

It's nice to hear about an author who cares enough about the end
product that bears their name to insist on quality. I'm so tired of
hearing authors whine that the publisher screwed up the book.

[Aahz]

In article <11************ **********@c77g 2000hse.googleg roups.com>,
7stud <bb**********@y ahoo.comwrote:

>
It's nice to hear about an author who cares enough about the end
product that bears their name to insist on quality. I'm so tired of
hearing authors whine that the publisher screwed up the book.

In all fairness, my co-author and primary partner (Stef Maruch) is a
technical writer and editor as a profession, and she used to work at
Yale Press. So we had more expertise on hand for knowing how to deal
with publishers. Like law and sausages, the publishing industry does
not bear close examination, and yes, if an author does not know what to
expect, it's easy to get a book screwed up.

For that matter, even when you *do* know what to expect, books still get
screwed up, though that happens more in fiction publishing (go look in
rec.arts.sf.com position for some horror stories written by experienced
multi-book authors).

On the gripping hand, I've tech edited three or four other Python books,
and several of them were clearly written by people who didn't know Python
and didn't want to learn enough to write a book about it. And they
ignored my edits. (This seems like another opportunity to thank our tech
editor, David Goodger.) So your larger point about careless authors is
essentially correct.
--
Aahz (aa**@pythoncra ft.com) <* http://www.pythoncraft.com/

"as long as we like the same operating system, things are cool." --piranha

[Alex Martelli]

7stud <bb**********@y ahoo.comwrote:

I'm curious, have you tried _Python for Dummies_?

No, I haven't. Unfortunately, I don't ever consider Dummies books.
That type of marketing appeals to certain people and not others. I'm
one of the others. I'll definitely take a look at it the next time
I'm in the bookstore.

Aahz's book is really good, in my opinion. So are many others in the
"for Dummies" series that I've had occasion to try (including the one
with the delightfully unintended pun in its title, "Bridge for Dummies":
despite the title it applies to declarers and defenders just as well:-).
Judging a book by its cover (and, by extension, by how its publisher
markets a series) is the proverbial epitome of superficiality.

We didn't wait for Wiley to offer, we simply insisted on providing a
list of index terms.

It's nice to hear about an author who cares enough about the end
product that bears their name to insist on quality. I'm so tired of
hearing authors whine that the publisher screwed up the book.

Oh, I'm SO awfully sorry to add to your tiredness! But the "whining"
that so saps your energy is a simple statement of fact, at least in my
case -- my publisher just didn't allow me sensible options for providing
the index myself. Oh, I could have "provided a list of index terms",
separate and floating in a vacuum (but "genexps" is in the index anyway,
as is "generator expressions":-), but there was no way I could do it
_right_, simply tying each index term to all the pages/page-ranges it
should point to by including suitable tags in my manuscript. I won't
tire you further with a tirade about my unpleasant tools experiences
with both the Cookbook and the Nutshell, but they're a good part of
what's holding me back from writing another book with the same publisher
(including a third edition of either).

I believe (and it seems the generally good reviews of the book support
me in this) that the Python community is better off with a Nutshell with
an imperfect index than it would be with no Nutshell at all, which would
likely be the case if I had "insisted on quality" as you apparently
would have preferred.
Alex

[Paul Rubin]

Dennis Lee Bieber <wl*****@ix.net com.comwrites:

Aahz's book is really good, in my opinion. So are many others in the
"for Dummies" series that I've had occasion to try (including the one
with the delightfully unintended pun in its title, "Bridge for Dummies":
despite the title it applies to declarers and defenders just as well:-).
Judging a book by its cover (and, by extension, by how its publisher
markets a series) is the proverbial epitome of superficiality.

The first edition "Wicca for Dummies" had a few laughs too...
Biggest one is that someone inserted a photo of the "Venus de Milo"
where the text called for the "Venus of Willendorf".

I wonder if they had a series about automotive safety engineering,
with a volume called "crash testing for dummies".

[Aahz]

In article <7x************ @ruckus.brouhah a.com>,
Paul Rubin <http://ph****@NOSPAM.i nvalidwrote:

>Dennis Lee Bieber <wl*****@ix.net com.comwrites:

>>
The first edition "Wicca for Dummies" had a few laughs too...
Biggest one is that someone inserted a photo of the "Venus de Milo"
where the text called for the "Venus of Willendorf".

I wonder if they had a series about automotive safety engineering,
with a volume called "crash testing for dummies".

Dunno, but the real howlers IMO have been: Customer Service for Dummies,
Borland C++ for Dummies, and IBS for Dummies.
--
Aahz (aa**@pythoncra ft.com) <* http://www.pythoncraft.com/

"as long as we like the same operating system, things are cool." --piranha