Since you've posted a few comments with this same sentiment a few times in this thread; can you expand on why you feel people would need to learn Ruby before getting started with Rails?

Also if you'd have taken a few seconds to open the link to the book and skim through the opening paragraphs you might have read this sentence:

> There are no formal prerequisites to this book, and the Ruby on Rails Tutorial contains integrated tutorials not only for Rails, but also for the underlying Ruby language, the default Rails testing framework (minitest), the Unix command line, HTML, CSS, a small amount of JavaScript, and even a little SQL.

I kind of agree with GP sentiment for two reasons:

1. Nowadays I mostly advice newcomers to start with sinatra instead of rails, because rails keeps growing in scope and the surface to cover is huge

2. Lots of things rails does might seem magical if you don't know ruby

Don't get me wrong, rails is still bread and butter of myself and other rubyists, but for a newcomer to start with rails is a somewhat strange/scary thing to do.

What does GP stand for in this context? I keep seeing it on HN and figured out what it means, but what do the actual letters stand for?

Grandparent. As in your comment is my parent comment, and your parent comment would be my grandparent, and so on.

Makes sense, thanks. I've seen 'OP' (original post/poster) enough times that I thought it was a variant on that and couldn't make sense of it.