4 ms·
I was trying to be clear! The book is ballpark 1000 pages, and early parts of the book claim that it is trying to be unusually comprehensive. So, 'introductio
by NY_Entrepreneur 15y ago
I was trying to be clear! The book is ballpark 1000 pages, and early parts of the book claim that it is trying to be unusually comprehensive. So, 'introduction' in the title conflicts with the breadth but is appropriate for the depth.
Maybe if I wrote twice as much as I did, then people would just find other objections, e.g., with length!
- scott_s 15y agoComprehensive for an introduction. It's supposed to be a student's first exposure to the material. If you were more succinct, people would probably object to your writing less. Your verbosity clouds your meaning.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- NY_Entrepreneur 15y ago"Succinct"? The book is 1000 pages and an "introduction" and the student's "first exposure", and you are comfortable with this juxtaposition? Early in my career, I got each volume of Knuth's TACP right away and dug in. No, I didn't solve all the exercises with stars! Later I had a course. The prof covered the high points of the sorting and searching volume in about two lectures. He was correct: Those were the high points. So, the prof gave an 'introduction', in two lectures. Knuth didn't give an 'introduction'. 1000 pages ain't an 'introduction' although in depth that book often is.
- scott_s 15y agoThe book's ability to communicate and your ability to communicate have nothing to do with each other.
- NY_Entrepreneur 15y agoThat's about me and not the book and, thus, inappropriate. You are not concerned about the book but are torqued at me for some of what I said about the book. You took what I said personally, as if I was mean to your favorite baby. You need to grow up.
- scott_s 15y agoIt's not an insult, but a suggestion. You complained that people don't understand you, and that perhaps you should use more words. I think the difficulty is the opposite.
- NY_Entrepreneur 15y agoI was being facetious.