Algorithms, by Jeff Erickson
81–90 of 245 posts
Re: Algorithms, by Jeff Erickson
#82> 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?
Solutions are the way I learn the thought process of author if he arrived at the final answer in a better way. Solutions expose errors in questions. Errors and typos in Indian texts were way more a common place in questions than in solutions. There was simply not a chance for a solution to have typo or logical errors.
If there are no solutions, I'd simply put it for later until I am proficient in the subject and want to try out the problems with confidence. There is always this insecurity when it comes to dealing with logic. Little things can slip in abstract thinking pretty easily. Silly mistakes take a toll. People like myself prefer to solve problems individually at our own pace. Solutions are a must for me. Of course, that 'later' almost always never comes.
Re: Algorithms, by Jeff Erickson
#83Maybe 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.
But please don't confuse "straightforward" with "obvious". Sometimes I deliberately gloss over mechanical details because I think they're a distraction from the main point. I'm NOT claiming that you should immediately know how to fill in the details; I'm claiming that filling in the details is boring.
Re: Algorithms, by Jeff Erickson
#84Bravo, Jeff!
Re: Algorithms, by Jeff Erickson
#85After 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
#86> 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?
I'm honestly seriously torn about this. There is a serious tension between pedagogical needs of students in formal classrooms and the pedagogical needs of self-learners. I've chosen to aim for the former. Yes, I know it's a bummer.
(From experience) providing solutions interferes with the learning process of my own students at Illinois. I have to change up homeworks and exam questions every semester, because otherwise students will look up and copy/memorize the answers instead of trying to figuring them out, which means they do worse on the exams where they HAVE to figure things out.
Also, a significant majority of the requests I get for solutions are from university students who want to cheat.
I do provide solutions to the homework and exam and lab problems I assign in any particular class, after the fact. (And I release those solutions publicly, despite the protests of colleagues at other universities, until the semester ends.) And I have started proving model solutions in the homeworks, so that the students know what kind of answers I'm looking for. (See the course materials page, under CS 374.)
In practice, my stance is becoming increasingly moot, as more of my official solutions get uploaded to places like CourseHero and Koofers and their many foreign-language equivalents.
I am very likely to include solutions for a subset of problems (maybe three or four per chapter) in a future edition. But that will take a significant amount of time, and I wanted to get something out the door.
Re: Algorithms, by Jeff Erickson
#87Earlier 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…
Re: Algorithms, by Jeff Erickson
#88Re: Algorithms, by Jeff Erickson
#89> 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?
could be a monetization idea/incentive to purchase, purchase the book get unique key, use key to check in to site to see results.
Re: Algorithms, by Jeff Erickson
#90Maybe 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.
Hi, I'm the author. If you find any particular claim of "obviousness" unclear, submit an issue request! But please don't confuse "straightforward" with "obvious". Sometimes I deliberately gloss over mechanical details because I think they're a distraction from the main point. I'm NOT claiming that you should immediately know how to fill in the details; I'm claiming that filling in the details is boring.
If it's obvious to the reader, they know it whether or not you tell them it's obvious. If it's not obvious to them, then they will try to figure it out. Telling this person "it's obvious" only serves to make them feel bad about not getting it right away.