31–40 of 78 posts
So what was the source format? Markdown?
Yes. 5-6 markdown files, converted to epub, mobi, pdf and html with pandoc. I know there are better workflows, especially in regards to embedding code (my approach was simple copy and paste), but if there's one recommendation I can make it's this one: check out pandoc. It's an amazing tool.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The best learning outcomes for the author I believe. But I'm more interested in the prospective reader's PoV.
I recently read a comment (I think it might have been on HN, but I can't find it) that said something like this: if you recently learned/mastered a topic, you're in a far better position to teach that topic than an expert, who's so deep into it, that they can't understand the beginners. I wish I could find the source for this, because it was much better put, but that comment contains the gist of my motivation behind…
This is really awesome. What I love especially is that the source code is syntax highlighted, I really wish I could have gotten that for my book.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My belief is that writing about a topic that one is trying to come to grips with helps ensure they achieve the best possible learning outcomes.
The best learning outcomes for the author I believe. But I'm more interested in the prospective reader's PoV.
I believe that J.K. Rowling used the same pattern for her Harry Potter books. She started writing them for children and then each book followed the same kids to their adulthood.
Anyone can share what sort of interpreter this is? Is it a walking-AST kind of thing, or something more advanced?
It's a AST walking interpreter, completely built from scratch, including the lexer, the parser, the AST and, of course, the walking/evaluation step.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The best learning outcomes for the author I believe. But I'm more interested in the prospective reader's PoV.
I recently read a comment (I think it might have been on HN, but I can't find it) that said something like this: if you recently learned/mastered a topic, you're in a far better position to teach that topic than an expert, who's so deep into it, that they can't understand the beginners. I wish I could find the source for this, because it was much better put, but that comment contains the gist of my motivation behind…
Whether that puts one in a far better position to teach than an expert probably depends on the expert. I definitely had math professors for whom the charge applied, and I'd speculate that an expert who's primarily focused on further mastery/development along the edges of the field might be someone who becomes less and less able to recall or relate to what it's like to take first steps into it. But on the other hand, I had math professors who clearly thought a lot about pedagogy as well as research, and practiced both at length... and I think someone who's spent significant time teaching beginners and reflecting on that as well as practicing their discipline and refining deep insights from that is likely in a better position to teach a topic than someone who just learned.
(And if you really want an optimal learning environment, put a class full of motivated learners in front of a teacher like that, and have them talk to each other. Hence the value of a good university course...)