4 ms·
I think it is, and if you don't want to take my word for it, John Carmack thinks the same :) There's an old video [0] where he talks in-depth about his explora
by ookdatnog 2y ago
I think it is, and if you don't want to take my word for it, John Carmack thinks the same :)
There's an old video [0] where he talks in-depth about his explorations of functional programming. It's perhaps a bit more about Haskell than about SICP, but in it he's also quite enthusiastic about what a veteran programmer can still learn from this book.
[0] https://youtu.be/1PhArSujR_A?si=OD8pGYsoGC7RXPVG&t=125 https://youtu.be/1PhArSujR_A?si=OD8pGYsoGC7RXPVG&t=125
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- ricksunny 2y agoDid he study it before or after Doom?
- mpalmer 2y agoThis question is answered immediately in the linked video.
- replygirl 2y agothis takes a lot longer to type than before or after
- vitus 2y ago11 minutes in, he mentions SICP as a book that he ended up working through exercises "in the past year" (so 2012 timeframe, well after the original Doom but before the reboot).
- ricksunny 2y agoThank you! :) Provides helpful context vis-a-vis evaluating possible critical-path enabling / contributing factors to achieving a key milestone.
- mpalmer 2y agoThink how long it would have taken to click the link!
- ricksunny 2y ago(About 9 minutes, acc. to the parallel subthread. My time on this thread is about 90 seconds so far not incl this current comment.)
- mpalmer 2y agoStill haven't clicked it, huh? If you did you'd see that the link takes you to straight to the moment in the video where he starts talking about functional programming.
- Zambyte 2y agoI don't have time to watch the video right now, but according to gpt watching the video for me: after.