3 ms·

So you want to learn Python?

9 points by astrec 17y ago

michael_dorfman 17y ago
I'm not going to argue with the notion that Knuth is "the source" when it comes to learning Computer Science, but his views on SICP are a bit idiosyncratic, don't you think? So, how do you learn about Computer Science? Some would no doubt recommend "Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs" by Abelson and Sussman here. (Someone sent me review copy of that book too.) But really, SICP (as it is often referred to) has its own agenda: convincing the reader that the most important thing computers can do is interpreting computer programs. This agenda has arguably caused the proliferation of Scheme implementations and indoctrinated many young minds with certain ideas about how to design and implement programming languages. But personally, I recommend you go straight to the source. After all these years, there is still no substitute for Knuth.
- plinkplonk 17y ago
  "but his views on SICP are a bit idiosyncratic, don't you think?" I'll say! I can't believe he wrote this. "SICP (as it is often referred to) has its own agenda: convincing the reader that the most important thing computers can do is interpreting computer programs. This agenda has arguably caused the proliferation of Scheme implementations and indoctrinated many young minds with certain ideas about how to design and implement programming languages." "indoctrinate" and "agenda" sound very harsh to me. I've read and worked through SICP and never felt it was an "indoctrination" attempt. Imagine this were a comment on HN - such a pathetic claim would be downvoted to oblivion. Just shows you can be very bright and still have blind spots. "But personally, I recommend you go straight to the source. After all these years, there is still no substitute for Knuth" I see TAOCP and SICP as complementary books not substitutes. I fail to see how one can be substituted for the other as a "learn to program" choice.

3 ms·

So you want to learn Python?

9 points by astrec 17y ago

michael_dorfman 17y ago
I'm not going to argue with the notion that Knuth is "the source" when it comes to learning Computer Science, but his views on SICP are a bit idiosyncratic, don't you think? So, how do you learn about Computer Science? Some would no doubt recommend "Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs" by Abelson and Sussman here. (Someone sent me review copy of that book too.) But really, SICP (as it is often referred to) has its own agenda: convincing the reader that the most important thing computers can do is interpreting computer programs. This agenda has arguably caused the proliferation of Scheme implementations and indoctrinated many young minds with certain ideas about how to design and implement programming languages. But personally, I recommend you go straight to the source. After all these years, there is still no substitute for Knuth.
- plinkplonk 17y ago
  "but his views on SICP are a bit idiosyncratic, don't you think?" I'll say! I can't believe he wrote this. "SICP (as it is often referred to) has its own agenda: convincing the reader that the most important thing computers can do is interpreting computer programs. This agenda has arguably caused the proliferation of Scheme implementations and indoctrinated many young minds with certain ideas about how to design and implement programming languages." "indoctrinate" and "agenda" sound very harsh to me. I've read and worked through SICP and never felt it was an "indoctrination" attempt. Imagine this were a comment on HN - such a pathetic claim would be downvoted to oblivion. Just shows you can be very bright and still have blind spots. "But personally, I recommend you go straight to the source. After all these years, there is still no substitute for Knuth" I see TAOCP and SICP as complementary books not substitutes. I fail to see how one can be substituted for the other as a "learn to program" choice.