Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Algorithms, by Jeff Erickson

jeffe.cs.illinois.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 245 posts

Re: Algorithms, by Jeff Erickson

#71

Post by reificator »

nf05papsjfVbc wrote: post #28
ryanmonroe wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you prefer not to have solutions, pretend you don't have solutions. Having solutions is strictly better (for the reader. I'm ignoring the cost of producing them to begin with)

"pretend you don't have solutions" is not a realistic approach. The strength of people's conviction to this will probably fall on a bell curve and few can resist the temptation when the problems get really tough. Accounting for how humans are, I do not see how one can easily say "Having solutions is strictly better". I can easily think of cases where it is indeed better to have solutions but to say "strictly" require…

It is absolutely a realistic approach, what are you talking about? Is it also not a realistic approach to eat your vegetables or perform routine exercise like walking around the block?

Without solutions at the back of the book, self-directed learners can't verify their own work. Don't cut out the less privileged learners from bettering themselves just because you have no concept of discipline.

Re: Algorithms, by Jeff Erickson

#72

Post by clishem »

briefcomment wrote: post #70

Are algorithms useful to learn for a non-programmer? Is there a benefit to thinking through what is presented in a book like this over solving general problems in a day-to-day context?

Please find something you love doing and learn more about that instead of picking up random things.

Re: Algorithms, by Jeff Erickson

#73

Post by ausjke »

After a quick browser it seems a little too academic for daily programmers like myself.

Would love to learn more about practical dynamic programming these days, hope there is a book about that extensively.

Re: Algorithms, by Jeff Erickson

#74

Post by daveFNbuck »

thrwthrw93223 wrote: post #34
nf05papsjfVbc wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"pretend you don't have solutions" is not a realistic approach. The strength of people's conviction to this will probably fall on a bell curve and few can resist the temptation when the problems get really tough. Accounting for how humans are, I do not see how one can easily say "Having solutions is strictly better". I can easily think of cases where it is indeed better to have solutions but to say "strictly" require…

Don’t rob the self-learner that doesn’t have access to TAs, fellow students, and professors the ability to check their work, just because someone else doesn’t have the discipline to not abuse it. Textbook solutions are good for those that aren’t in school, aren’t in formal programs and have no other way of receiving feedback. The “you should know if you’re right” mentality doesn’t necessarily fit a person that’s been…

I took a quick look through the first set of exercises and a lot of the problems are open-ended and don't have specific answers. Seeing a different answer than yours doesn't tell you much about whether your answer is correct.

Even if you do have a similar proof to the one in the answer key, that doesn't mean your proof is correct. Correctness can often hinge on very subtle distinctions. You really need a TA or instructor to read your proof if you want meaningful feedback.

Re: Algorithms, by Jeff Erickson

#75

Post by endlessvoid94 »

primitivesuave wrote: post #66

Jeff Erickson was my algorithms professor in 2012. He exemplifies the articulate, passionate educator that I wish I had for my other CS subjects. I recognize many of these notes having read them many times in preparation for quite difficult exams - a fun anecdote shared among people who've taken the class is the 25% credit given on any exam question just for writing "I don't know", effectively a reward for acknowledg…

I've also taken his class and can attest to his subject matter expertise and excellent teaching style

Re: Algorithms, by Jeff Erickson

#77

Post by p1itopre »

_underflow_ wrote: post #3

> Please do not ask me for solutions to the exercises. Even if you are [an] instructor, I will say no. That's kind of a bummer. I like to be able to check my answers when teaching myself things. Am I somehow alone in that?

No, you are not. The extensive problem sets at the end of each chapter is main contribution of this work (imho). However this is not a shortcoming these days.

I spend upto ~1 hour on each problem. And then I google keywords from the questions. Someone somewhere has one possible solution. Usually , this is enough to set me on the right track.

Re: Algorithms, by Jeff Erickson

#78

Post by EnFinlay »

briefcomment wrote: post #70

Are algorithms useful to learn for a non-programmer? Is there a benefit to thinking through what is presented in a book like this over solving general problems in a day-to-day context?

As a whole, I doubt a book like this would be of much use to a non-programmer. There are some high level tricks that might be fun to learn, and could be loosely applied to day-to-day thinking (should this be solved in a brute force way, or is there some shortcut). Overall the book (I assume, I haven't read it) is technical and precise solutions to technical problems.

Algorithms are just ways of solving technical problems in the most efficient way possible (for various definitions of efficiency). They are deep programming which even most programmers don't use frequently.

Re: Algorithms, by Jeff Erickson

#80

Post by konart »

Maybe that because english is not my native language, but I honestly find this way of material presentation as rather confusing.

PS: oh and of course all those 'It’s quite easy to show that the...' and similar 'by this point it should be obvious'. No, it is not... I guess I will never understand or use those algorithms even though I'd like to.

Post reply on HN