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

Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs – JavaScript Adaptation

sicp.comp.nus.edu.sg

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 188 posts

Re: Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs – JavaScript Adaptation

#61

Post by ken »

tiborsaas wrote: post #47
ken wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? Why does a textbook about fundamental principles need to be 'adapted' to technology currently in use in industry? The Feynman Lectures uses an example of a screw jack with 10 threads per inch, and a 20" lever. Should we update this to a name brand screw jack with 8 or 16 threads per inch, and an 18" breaker bar, because those are common in industry today? Be sure to extend the introduction of that chapter to inc…

> Why? Why does a textbook about fundamental principles need to be 'adapted' to technology currently in use in industry? Because it's widely used in the industry.

I don't know anyone who first read this book outside of college. Its concepts aren't exactly directly applicable to typical work. If you're given the task to build something in Javascript for work, it's probably not a metacircular evaluator or a register machine simulator, or even a closure-based object system.

I'm curious who's reading SICP who finds it difficult to grok in Scheme, or more useful in Javascript. What are you doing in the industry that familiar syntax is top priority?

I would think that other books, specific to Javascript, would be a much better fit for people writing pretty much anything in Javascript.

Re: Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs – JavaScript Adaptation

#62

Post by ken »

_pmf_ wrote: post #45
voldacar wrote: post #3

There's kind of a reason why SICP was written in Scheme in mind and not a blub language...

Hint: PG's little web shop would have been exactly as successful in PHP.

Is that sarcasm? I can't even tell any more. Assuming it's not:

Do you mean modern PHP? "The source code of the Viaweb editor was probably about 20-25% macros." So are you suggesting they should have started work by extending PHP with Lisp's macro system? Or just worked an order-of-magnitude faster to make up for not having one?

Or do you mean the actual PHP that was available when they started Viaweb? It's hard to imagine how Personal Home Page Tools 1.0 (not even called a 'programming language' at the time) would have been at all a reasonable alternative to ANSI Common Lisp. It was a few C files that could do basic variable substitution and output HTML tags to stdout. It couldn't do loops or if-statements, much less access files or databases.

Re: Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs – JavaScript Adaptation

#63

Post by caiocaiocaio »

slimed wrote: post #52
b0rsuk wrote: post #49

Every now and then a great movie comes out. Then it gets its American remake. It's been proven you can put Al Pacino, Robert de Niro and Bruce Willis in any movie (with predictable results!). This is the book equivalent of an American remake for me. Is Javascript the new pseudocode? Honestly I'd rather be forced to learn a new language to understand a book than to read the book adapted to JS.

There is a simple explanation of course. You are not the intended audience. Ditto for the blockbusters you mentioned.

The target audience are people who don't want to learn Lisp but want to write a bunch of Lisp interpreters and compilers. Obviously.

Re: Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs – JavaScript Adaptation

#64

Post by scottoreily »

b0rsuk wrote: post #49

Every now and then a great movie comes out. Then it gets its American remake. It's been proven you can put Al Pacino, Robert de Niro and Bruce Willis in any movie (with predictable results!). This is the book equivalent of an American remake for me. Is Javascript the new pseudocode? Honestly I'd rather be forced to learn a new language to understand a book than to read the book adapted to JS.

Typical dramatic Hacker News user. JS is a great language and enjoyed by millions of developers.

Re: Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs – JavaScript Adaptation

#65

Post by bryanrasmussen »

iaml wrote: post #43
bryanrasmussen wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

rebuttal https://journal.stuffwithstuff.com/2013/07/18/javascript-isn... although I don't necessarily agree that JavaScript is so minimal anymore.

This rebuttal isn't worth much, as it was written back when js was a much different language, some 2 years before let/const, promises and probably half of what modern js developers use day-to-day. It is also way too snarky to take it seriously. Not gonna lie, it was a fun read though.

yeah, that's why it's not such a minimal language anymore.

Re: Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs – JavaScript Adaptation

#66

Post by mpfundstein »

dspillett wrote: post #11
mpfundstein wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what a stupid comment. why is modern javascript a blub language? and what does it matter anyway? the concepts are the same.

Any language can be a blub language, assuming we are referring to the same thing here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Graham_(programmer)#Blub

Ah! I totally misunderstood that. Thx

Re: Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs – JavaScript Adaptation

#67

Post by slimed »

caiocaiocaio wrote: post #63
slimed wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a simple explanation of course. You are not the intended audience. Ditto for the blockbusters you mentioned.

The target audience are people who don't want to learn Lisp but want to write a bunch of Lisp interpreters and compilers. Obviously.

That's a pretty narrow view of the teachings to be gained from SICP.

Re: Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs – JavaScript Adaptation

#68

Post by vanderZwan »

slimed wrote: post #52
b0rsuk wrote: post #49

Every now and then a great movie comes out. Then it gets its American remake. It's been proven you can put Al Pacino, Robert de Niro and Bruce Willis in any movie (with predictable results!). This is the book equivalent of an American remake for me. Is Javascript the new pseudocode? Honestly I'd rather be forced to learn a new language to understand a book than to read the book adapted to JS.

There is a simple explanation of course. You are not the intended audience. Ditto for the blockbusters you mentioned.

I'm with you. As much as I find most remakes terrible, to say others should not enjoy them is a form of gatekeeping.

If people who would otherwise not enjoy any of the insights to be gained from SICP do get into it through this version, great.

Re: Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs – JavaScript Adaptation

#69

Post by austincummings »

braythwayt wrote: post #23
voldacar wrote: post #3

There's kind of a reason why SICP was written in Scheme in mind and not a blub language...

Of course SICP is brilliant in Scheme. But hello? There is no such thing as a “blub language.” Your comment misrepresents the entire point of the original PG essay! The point is that givens some fictional language called “Blub” for the sake of the essay, some programmers believe that their language has everything that could possibly be useful, productive, expressive, &c. But PG’s contention that languages exist on a…

> original PG essay

Which essay is that? I'd be interested in reading it.

Re: Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs – JavaScript Adaptation

#70

Post by iNate2000 »

austincummings wrote: post #69
braythwayt wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course SICP is brilliant in Scheme. But hello? There is no such thing as a “blub language.” Your comment misrepresents the entire point of the original PG essay! The point is that givens some fictional language called “Blub” for the sake of the essay, some programmers believe that their language has everything that could possibly be useful, productive, expressive, &c. But PG’s contention that languages exist on a…

> original PG essay Which essay is that? I'd be interested in reading it.

http://www.paulgraham.com/avg.html
Post reply on HN