4 ms·
That's an interesting comparison. K&R did nothing for me, I honestly did not understand C until I read Harbison & Steele.
by dorfsmay 7y ago
That's an interesting comparison. K&R did nothing for me, I honestly did not understand C until I read Harbison & Steele.
- catalogia 7y agoK&R blew my mind when I was a teenager, but years flipping through it again it does nothing for me. I think the experience somebody will have with K&R depends greatly on their previous experiences.
- zabzonk 7y agoIt's certainly not "mind-blowing", and is not intended to be, but it is a brilliant example of how a technical book on a specific programming language should be written.
- dorfsmay 7y agoThe point some of us are trying to make here is that K&R works for some learning styles but not others. It's definitely not universal.
- catalogia 7y ago"Blow my mind" might be a bit of an exaggeration, but whatever magic was once in the book is now gone for me. Experience with other books and other languages has shifted my perspective such that K&R no longer feels special to me.
- sireat 7y ago30 years later I still love K&R . Harbison & Steele is a fantastic reference. However, I could never get into SICP mostly because it was so... impractical and pure. Besides i'd had enough of RPN working on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elektronika_MK-61 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elektronika_MK-61 . I suppose one should get into SICP when one is still at the right age (<25)