How much time did it take finishing per volume ?
How & when should one read this book according to you.
Ask HN: Have you read "The Art of Computer Programming"?
1–10 of 23 posts
Re: Ask HN: Have you read "The Art of Computer Programming"?
#2It's a reference book, not a book to be read from cover to cover.
Re: Ask HN: Have you read "The Art of Computer Programming"?
#3I read it a long time ago, around 1990. I remember people talking about it a lot in the early 80s
It's a seminal early text, but CS is a fast-changing field so I couldn't recommend it as a primary text for somebody who wants to learn CS today, however, it's definitely fun to flip through.
His stuff on "Searching and Sorting", for instance, just isn't relevant in a day when your language has a sort() function built in and hashtables. Also, in some of the areas I know about in depth, such as random number generation, Knuth's book is dangerously behind the times.
Re: Ask HN: Have you read "The Art of Computer Programming"?
#4"It's a pleasure to meet you, Professor Knuth, I've read all of your books." (Steve Jobs)
"You're full of shit," (Don Knuth) [1]
I think that no one in the world, except Knuth, has read the entire TAOCP (joke.)
[1] http://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?story=Close_Encounters_...
Re: Ask HN: Have you read "The Art of Computer Programming"?
#5It's a reference book, not a book to be read from cover to cover.
Exactly. And when I need to learn some algorithm, I prefer high-level pseudo code rather than low-level pseudo asm.
Re: Ask HN: Have you read "The Art of Computer Programming"?
#6[deleted]
Re: Ask HN: Have you read "The Art of Computer Programming"?
#7I've been reading a little bit of it every day. The quality of the writing is top notch, so I can actually ready it just for fun. I'm still on the first volume, and plan to be for a while. I definitely get lost on the mathier parts of it, but for the most part I can follow along, and I'd consider myself on the advanced side of intermediate.
Re: Ask HN: Have you read "The Art of Computer Programming"?
#8"It's a pleasure to meet you, Professor Knuth, I've read all of your books." (Steve Jobs) "You're full of shit," (Don Knuth) [1] I think that no one in the world, except Knuth, has read the entire TAOCP (joke.) [1] http://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?story=Close_Encounters_...
You may like to watch this.
Re: Ask HN: Have you read "The Art of Computer Programming"?
#9I have read sections, more in the super-reference mode. For example, there was a period i was interested in random number generation, so that section was one. Another time, we had to implement floating point (in the pre-80x87 days), and that section was absolutely essential.
Incidentally, I have two copies, one set is the original edition. That set has something that has been deleted from later references--the fold-out page for Tape Merging. It is illustrating such tings as Read-backward polyphase merge, Read-backward oscillating sort, and Read-forward polyphase merge. I guess we don't sort on tape much anymore.
Re: Ask HN: Have you read "The Art of Computer Programming"?
#10I've read portions of volumes 1, 3 and 4A so I haven't finished the books.
The thing about these books is that while you can _Read_ them like any other book, reference or otherwise, what sets them apart are the questions at the end that have always been very thought provoking.
4A to me was the most useful - combinatorial algorithms, talking about generating trees, permutations. Reading it really cleared out some concepts that relate to sorting and searching. It's almost like someone condensed all known information about those algorithms (till the last 2-3 years) into one dense manual for dummies. Oh wait..
And, they don't look half bad on your bookshelf with that leather cover (although I don't own the boxed set). I've always been tempted to buy.
There's no better time to read them than right now. And I don't think the right way to read them is volume wise. What I've done is to go through the table of contents and pick something that looks interesting, and chew on it.