3 ms·

I think reading book about a programming language, or an accessible technology is indeed a waste of time (and a bit of money). Why not just follow a good online

by t0mk 11y ago

I think reading book about a programming language, or an accessible technology is indeed a waste of time (and a bit of money). Why not just follow a good online tutorial and try things straight up? With hands-on from the start, you won't comprehend all the stuff early on, no doubt. But those holes in your understanding of the concept are really useful because it makes you more motivated to fill them, and feel rewarded when you finally get it. Also, I noticed some sort of book-hoarding learning fallacy between people I know - when somebody wants to learn a technology, he/she sees ordering an Oreilly book on the topic as a valid part of the learning effort. As if the idea would be "I'll get a book, read it, ???, become a guru". Usually the person doesn't even get to read it (no time after when it's delivered; new obsession; ...). And even if, reading one book won't make you even a reasonable <whatever> programmer. You'd just make better use of the time following a good tutorial, and then perhaps hacking in a FOSS project.

drtz 11y ago
> ...he/she sees ordering an Oreilly book on the topic as a valid part of the learning effort. It's easy enough to see the difference between ordering a book and reading it. Regardless, in response to your overall point, some people can actually learn a great deal by reading a book that interests them. In addition, books can be read when working through an online tutorial is impractical -- standing on a train on your way to work, lying in bed before going to sleep, sitting on the beach or by the pool. Finally, books provide context missing from your run-of-the-mill tutorial: history and motivation for the technology (why things were built the way they were), references for further reading, etc...
Can_Not 11y ago
I wouldn't say reading a typical book is a waste of time, but as a rule of thumb that might be worth saying. Action (e.g. practice, doing, etc..) is the gold standard. When you do actions, you read scattered tutorials, explanations of exception stacks, and multiple API documentation. If your non actions exceed 50% of your actions, then you are probably reading into one ear straight out the other. A good computer science book reading can be a real asset to someone who's looking to improve their work.

by t0mk 11y ago

drtz 11y ago

> ...he/she sees ordering an Oreilly book on the topic as a valid part of the learning effort. It's easy enough to see the difference between ordering a book and reading it. Regardless, in response to your overall point, some people can actually learn a great deal by reading a book that interests them. In addition, books can be read when working through an online tutorial is impractical -- standing on a train on your way to work, lying in bed before going to sleep, sitting on the beach or by the pool. Finally, books provide context missing from your run-of-the-mill tutorial: history and motivation for the technology (why things were built the way they were), references for further reading, etc...

Can_Not 11y ago

I wouldn't say reading a typical book is a waste of time, but as a rule of thumb that might be worth saying. Action (e.g. practice, doing, etc..) is the gold standard. When you do actions, you read scattered tutorials, explanations of exception stacks, and multiple API documentation. If your non actions exceed 50% of your actions, then you are probably reading into one ear straight out the other. A good computer science book reading can be a real asset to someone who's looking to improve their work.