5 ms·
How does it compare to KnR?
by quackulus 3y ago
How does it compare to KnR?
- nesarkvechnep 3y agoThe article states that it’s “generally an average-to-poor book”. Is KnR a poor book?
- quackulus 3y agoI meant coverage, not impression. I think KnR is a great book.
- polalavik 3y agoI’m always a little confused by the hype of KnR. It seems like just an introduction on the syntax of c? It doesn’t seem to really tell you how to build great programs with C or anything more complex than the absolute basics which you can find on the internet for free.
- bcrl 3y agoI found the Annotated ANSI C Standard by Herbert Schildt to be far more helpful in understanding C syntax than the K&R book ever was. I was lucky enough to find it in a local book store while still in high school in 1993.
- quackulus 3y agoThanks, although I’m puzzled after reading that Schildt has “clear style that leaves the reader confident but dangerously ignorant.” [0] [0] http://herbert.the-little-red-haired-girl.org/en/c-links/index.html http://herbert.the-little-red-haired-girl.org/en/c-links/ind...
- AntiRush 3y agoThis book was so bad it inspired a new word: http://catb.org/jargon/html/B/bullschildt.html http://catb.org/jargon/html/B/bullschildt.html
- nhatcher 3y agoI learned C in the early 90's with one of Schildt books. I actually did learn something. So there is that. It has a place close to my heart but I have to agree with most. It's not a great book. I wish I would have a couple of good examples at hand, though
- mochaki 3y ago[dead]
- marginalia_nu 3y agoThe actual information is a bit out of date, and it's not a best practices manual or anything like that. K&R's strength is its exceptional style. It's a real masterpiece in clarity, and sets a mark that most technical literature fails to pass.