Funny you mention that one. I have been re-reading that book the past few weeks. This book takes a bit of a different angle on explaining computers. I really

Funny you mention that one. I have been re-reading that book the past few weeks. This book takes a bit of a different angle on explaining computers. I really enjoy the history. My only complaint would be that I think he has a Microsoft bias (but then I guess I am biased myself). And similarly, I have a minor annoyance with the OP's mention of Linux, and only Linux, when he touches on calling conventions. This bias toward one system, and ignorance of others, is typical of many websites and documentation. To be fair, the OP mostly avoids it. To be clear, great explanations of computers to me are ones that either: 1) take great care to stay completely neutral and only discuss universally shared traits across systems, 2) go to great lengths to try to be as comprehensive as possible, including many systems and all their commonalities and idiosyncracies, or 3) focus only on one system and go into great detail how it works. The more the author strays from 1, 2 or 3, the less likely I am to read their work. Petzold pays ample attention to Morse code and similar succinct ways of communicating information. In my opinion this type of focus is the mark of a skilled coder. When I look at the entries to IOCC, it is no surprise to me that Morse code is (or at least was) a frequent focus of the entrants.