Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am not sure how it is related to 2015. I actually prefer a ps file that I can render to a PDF easily instead a Javascript heavy messy website where everything is distracting you from the content. On the top of that Knuth invented Tex to be able to write scientific documentations with ease[1]. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TeX
I vastly prefer HTML with searchable text, easy copy-pasting capability, easy indexability, etc. to PDF with its outdated printed-page metaphor. On the other hand, it's Knuth and TAOCP, so I can't really complain much.
Current draft of The Art of Computer Programming pre-fascicle 6a [ps]
61–70 of 116 posts
Re: Current draft of The Art of Computer Programming pre-fascicle 6a [ps]
#62Earlier quoted context omitted.
To be fair, books on PDF are electronic books. Kindles don't handle them well, but tablets do. Also, I agree with him! ePUB and Kindle markup/typesetting just don't look as good yet, and they certainly can't handle complex mathematics with any amount of grace.
> books on PDF are electronic books. Kindles don't handle them well, but tablets do. Pdfs on current generation kindles (300dpi) look great, actually, as long as they are computer-generated. Scanned documents can be hit-or-miss, though.
Can it handle figures too?
Re: Current draft of The Art of Computer Programming pre-fascicle 6a [ps]
#63Re: Current draft of The Art of Computer Programming pre-fascicle 6a [ps]
#64There's some speculation about where the next breakthroughs will come from at the end of the chapter; it will be interesting to look back in 10-20 years and see if Knuth was correct.
A surprising tidbit: Knuth believes that P=NP is true, but the algorithm to solve NP is unknowable - footnote on page 1 (pdf page 9). Proponents of RSA, DHE crypto - take note.
Re: Current draft of The Art of Computer Programming pre-fascicle 6a [ps]
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
Everyone with a good computer science education should be able to digest his books. I know that around here college education is often derided as outdated, impractical, too costly (which is a USA-ian problem), or outright irrelevant, but what Knuth writes about ain't rocket science yet important for many a programmer to understand. He writes in a quite readable style about the fundamentals of programming and computer…
I like your sentiment, but your "good computer science education" sounds a lot like a "true scotsman". A lot of the people I work with have BS's in CS and a lot don't. I haven't seen any correlation between a real in depth understanding of computer science and a CS degree. I agree programmers should be able to read and understand Knuth's books, but I don't think a CS degree is preparation. Would you think someone nee…
* writing * accounting * organizational psychology * small amounts of business stuff * lots of EE, digital and analog * how to read and write research papers * how to research * how to prove theorems (important if you are inventing your own) * linear algebra, calculus, stats and probability, discrete algebra * physics I-III, plus 1 semester of experimental physics * chemistry (I,II, no organic) * a bit of philosophy * circuit design * numerical computation
It would be a Herculean task to take all that up in your spare time to the level I did at school (I still learn on my own time, so you have to catch up not just with what I did at school, but everything afterwards). It's 4+ years of opportunity to bump against really good minds. I went to professors and said "I want to learn x". (think of the course catalog as a suggestion!) That got me, among other things a co-authorship with a professor on an academic book. All of that has been relevant to my career except for the chemistry. Even with that, my first job could have used it if I had stuck around more, and it is useful to know if you want to be scientifically literate.
Or, you know, you can punch your time cards, do the bare minimum, and graduate with a pretty useless certificate.
College as voc tech to learn to manipulate the LAMP stack is probably a poor choice of time. If you want to be able to take a job to compute cancer statistics, program robots, build digital interface cards, perform computer vision, simulate the ocean, write aircraft wing simulations, model and research traffic flow, work on medical devices, you almost certainly need more then votech and/or self learning, IMO. I've done most in that list professionally, and friends of mine have done the rest (no rockets in that list, but I was offered a job to do that, turned it down).
There are multiple paths to life, but the chance to just think and learn for awhile is pretty incredible if you can afford it.
Re: Current draft of The Art of Computer Programming pre-fascicle 6a [ps]
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
I like your sentiment, but your "good computer science education" sounds a lot like a "true scotsman". A lot of the people I work with have BS's in CS and a lot don't. I haven't seen any correlation between a real in depth understanding of computer science and a CS degree. I agree programmers should be able to read and understand Knuth's books, but I don't think a CS degree is preparation. Would you think someone nee…
Certainly, if all you're after is a degree (the certificate), not much effort is needed. On the other hand, if you want to, you can get more out of college. Which brings me back to my "good computer science education": it depends a lot on the aims of the student and how she approached her learning. That is not to say that there are no computer science programs that is basically vocational training, nor that there are…
I guess what I'm saying is that an undergraduate CS degree is just a vocational degree. College does not prepare you to read TAoCP. If you want a solid CS foundation you have to self study.
Re: Current draft of The Art of Computer Programming pre-fascicle 6a [ps]
#67Earlier quoted context omitted.
One click to download, two double-clicks (one for the gzip, one for the PS) to open on my Mac.
http://view.samurajdata.se/
Re: Current draft of The Art of Computer Programming pre-fascicle 6a [ps]
#68Re: Current draft of The Art of Computer Programming pre-fascicle 6a [ps]
#69Re: Current draft of The Art of Computer Programming pre-fascicle 6a [ps]
#70[deleted]