3 ms·
It's not useful as a reference, but it is full of delight – though only if you actually do the problems. Many of them are chains of inquiry that build on each o
by apetresc 11y ago
It's not useful as a reference, but it is full of delight – though only if you actually do the problems. Many of them are chains of inquiry that build on each other and culminate in some result that gives you so much intuition about whatever it was they were dealing with.
If you're in the Toronto region, I actually run a reading group for these books: http://www.meetup.com/Knuth-Reading-Group-Art-of-Computer-Programming/ http://www.meetup.com/Knuth-Reading-Group-Art-of-Computer-Pr.... We get together about once a month and go through the problems together. Just last night we had a 2.5-hour session about only section 2.3.4.1. I doubt you'd be able to get this much content from a sub-sub-sub-section of CLRS.
- pmelendez 11y ago> It's not useful as a reference, I would argue the opposite... When I needed to read about the different approaches on how to shuffle a deck for a card game TAOCP was there for me. When I needed to investigate different approaches for string comparison algorithms, TAOCP was there for me. When I didn't understand what was the deal and why was so hard to implement a random number generator, TAOCP was there too. Anytime that I needed a reference for a core CS algorithm or data structure, TAOCP worked very well as a reference for me. It feels like the Britannica Encyclopedia for CS.
- microcolonel 11y agoI keep neglecting to come, mostly out of shame; frankly I find the texts troublingly dense and don't want to feel weak in public.