41–50 of 59 posts
I cannot recommend it enough.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Lets do the math - this isn't fiction we're talking about, it takes at least 2 weeks to read a technical book and this is assuming you can read at least 1 or several chapters per day, or maybe skipping chapters, which can't happen for many of those books, as some of them are pretty challenging and you have to think about what you're reading, you have to try out samples, you have to do extra reading to clarify stuff a…
I at least briefly went through the almost all books before putting them into list (not counting early releases). It's not required to read every word in the book to understand what's in it. I've heard about "FP in Scala" and it's loaded into my kindle prepared for vacation (together with many other)...
Nice list, will be referring back to this. Just a heads up the link to 'All About Monads' in the Haskell section is broken, think it should be http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/All_About_Monads
I don't like this article. Lots of people do a Google-search on books on various topics, then publish a blog article without having read them. I'm seeing books in there that are awful choices. And oh look, the Amazon articles are tagged, which means the author gets affiliate compensations. And what do you know, it's the hollyday season, so people buy stuff on Amazon. And don't get me wrong, I'm fine with that, I did…
At the very least, you could mention which and why.
There's a hell of a lot more value in...
"The ZINC experiment: an economical implementation of the ML language is a technical report, written by Xavier Leroy (author of OCaml) in 1990th, and it contains pretty detailed description of ML-like language implementation. This report could be very interesting for all who wants to know about internals of Caml & OCaml languages."
...x 132 from someone who may or may or may not have actually read what's linked than a simple "awful" without any context or qualification.
I mean, you could have just dropped a link to your own site and added something of value, instead of creating a nonsense tangent of accusation:
https://www.bionicspirit.com/blog/2013/05/13/getting-started...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I second that, it's been the best course I've taken up on coursera so far (with Dan Boneh's crypto). The lectures are great, but the best for me was the high quality provided course notes. I read those in my morning and evening commutes and I didn't even have to watch the videos! The exercises were well crafted, guiding you part by part to build your program, and challenging enough that you learned something valuable…
> They are tedious, but for the wrong reasons: you have to make a lot of guesses on what are exactly the semantics of what you're supposed to implement, sifting through the forum and the FAQ for relevant information. I look at their exercises more from a "I'll do it until I feel I have learned the core concepts" rather than "I'll do it until the grader gives me 100%". If you're not taking the course for credit, your…
If the grader is marking you off on a certain aspect of the assignment, how do you know you have actually learned the core concepts? How do you know you aren't missing something important? The problem with "doing it until I feel I have learned the core concepts" is that I don't know what I don't know (unknown unknowns). That's part of why a structured course is supposed to be valuable, because it doesn't let me skip important concepts.
This course can be salvaged the second time around, but it is going to require a bit of polishing.
I don't like this article. Lots of people do a Google-search on books on various topics, then publish a blog article without having read them. I'm seeing books in there that are awful choices. And oh look, the Amazon articles are tagged, which means the author gets affiliate compensations. And what do you know, it's the hollyday season, so people buy stuff on Amazon. And don't get me wrong, I'm fine with that, I did…
> "I'm seeing books in there that are awful choices." At the very least, you could mention which and why. There's a hell of a lot more value in... "The ZINC experiment: an economical implementation of the ML language is a technical report, written by Xavier Leroy (author of OCaml) in 1990th, and it contains pretty detailed description of ML-like language implementation. This report could be very interesting for all w…
What you're doing is a direct ad-hominem btw. I don't need qualifications to infer that it's impossible for somebody to read 132 books on some of the hardest topics in CS. We also have different definitions for what "value" is.
Great list! A lot of the stuff there is to know about functional programming is still only contained in academic papers, and indeed many of these listed books are texts in programming languages that cite a great deal of the important literature. There is much about programming languages and functional programming that one might read interspersed with these books. Other than following references in the backs of many o…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I had absolutely no FP background and I found it fantastic. Hard, yes, but fantastic. You have to be prepared to put in the hours that the course says you should put in, and you have to be prepared to spend a lot of time reading about other people's confusion on the discussion forums.
Happy to see you have such a positive attitude about hard learning. It pained me to see noobs being depressed and self-deprecative on the irc channel. I understand their feelings, I felt the same before it was all blurry, the irony is that I couldn't explain them how I got to understanding, it was just maturation, which they didn't wanna hear about.
Seeing the absolute beginners stuggle is painful, but at least they are making an attempt.
Btw, the craziest coursera forms I ever saw were in the non-tech fields. In Into to Finance it was so bad; at least our sort don't type posts in all caps ;)
This is excellent review, no doubt, by a well known scholar.) The only problem is that there are so many books and so little time. So, to get a quick and productive crash-course I would recommend just a few selected resources. * SICP based course CS 61A by Brian Harvey (Youtube) * HtDP2 and a wonderful course based on it - Introduction to Systematic Program Design by Gregor Kiczales (the author of The Art Of Metaobje…
Grossman's PL course is not the hardest of them all, but it did provide had the most value, compared to the other Coursera courses I've taken. Truly excellent.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> They are tedious, but for the wrong reasons: you have to make a lot of guesses on what are exactly the semantics of what you're supposed to implement, sifting through the forum and the FAQ for relevant information. I look at their exercises more from a "I'll do it until I feel I have learned the core concepts" rather than "I'll do it until the grader gives me 100%". If you're not taking the course for credit, your…
If the lectures do not do a good job of teaching the material and the assignments do not actually do a good job of testing your understanding of the material, what is the point of the course? I think epsylon is accurately presenting the prevailing opinion of the course. It's not very good and is a time sink for all the wrong reasons. If the grader is marking you off on a certain aspect of the assignment, how do you k…