Live data from Hacker News

Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs (1996) [pdf]

opendocs.github.io

81–90 of 151 posts

Re: Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs (1996) [pdf]

#81
post #74

Anyone else feel like this book is really overrated? I've enjoyed the classical mechanics book by the same authors a lot more since it goes over a particularly good application where functional ideas shine

I do think it's a book of quality, which admittedly is a relatively rare category. But yes, I think it's hugely overrated, especially when characterized as the "one true best way" or something, to learn programming. (Note that I am commenting on the first half or so of the book, never having gotten past that. Maybe the last half of the book is the best book ever written, I do not know.) For one thing, half of the exa…

There's an interview of Abelson floating around where he is asked why there was so much calculus in the examples and exercises. His response was that it was written for students who had just finished multiple semesters of calculus, so it made sense to use it. He goes on to indicate they made a second version, handed out as class notes to students in art degrees where the calculus was all replaced.

I also think you are introducing functional programming the wrong way to beginners. It's best and most intuitive use imho is in a math class. For example this book: https://cs.wheaton.edu/~tvandrun/dmfp/ has little prereqs, and will teach the reader both programming and math regardless of educational background. It really, really shines when it comes to learning counter-intuitive things like cardinality. I'm not the only person who thinks so either, here is one of the curriculum designers of Bootstrap, a US highschool programming curriculum, explaining how naturally that style of programming fits with algebra classes. https://www.janestreet.com/tech-talks/curriculumn-design/

Re: Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs (1996) [pdf]

#82
post #20

The contents of the book are wonderful, but I can't stop admiring the TeX typesetting itself. It's startling how effortless it is to read this document compared to 99% of Web-based reading I do every day. The things that stand out to me most are the lack of vertical whitespace "rivers" due to the smart kerning & tracking, the small-caps for technical initialisms like 'HTML', and the beautiful beautiful Garamond of th…

TeX isn't so bad when you use a typeface other than the eyeball-scarring, madness-inducing Computer Modern.

What’s wrong with computer modern?

Re: Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs (1996) [pdf]

#84
post #57
post #27

Question: will you recommend SICP as an intro to programming book for say high schoolers? Or, does it assume some prereqs?

http://people.eecs.berkeley.edu/~bh/ss-toc2.html Bills itself as an intro to SICP for high schoolers.

Thanks, did a quick glance, looks great. Might be perfect for my needs.

Re: Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs (1996) [pdf]

#85
post #20

The contents of the book are wonderful, but I can't stop admiring the TeX typesetting itself. It's startling how effortless it is to read this document compared to 99% of Web-based reading I do every day. The things that stand out to me most are the lack of vertical whitespace "rivers" due to the smart kerning & tracking, the small-caps for technical initialisms like 'HTML', and the beautiful beautiful Garamond of th…

TeX isn't so bad when you use a typeface other than the eyeball-scarring, madness-inducing Computer Modern.

To each their own of course but I rather love that typeface

Re: Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs (1996) [pdf]

#86
post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does it make sense to use Clojure while reading the book?

I think it makes sense to use whatever language you want, and the ideas in the book don't only apply to Scheme. I've been working through the book in Javascript - https://github.com/ahuth/sicp/ . Maybe I'm losing something by doing it in JS instead of Scheme, but I'm still learning a lot and having a ton of fun. Wrote a little bit about SICP here: https://ahuth.github.io/articles/the-first-time-sicp-blew-my... .

I think if a language has decent lambdas - JavaScript qualifies - it'll work for SICP. That said, using Scheme for it will give you a much better appreciation of an underrated language.

Re: Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs (1996) [pdf]

#87

The ebook on https://github.com/sarabander/sicp-epub/ seems to be inaccessible, trying to fetch it via git lfs gives "This repository is over its data quota. Purchase more data packs to restore access." Does anybody know where I can/should host a copy?

I've cloned and built from the repo.

On Debian GNU/Linux, I had to install a few packages in addition to base tetex: latexmk fonts-inconsolata linuxlibertine fonts-linuxlibertine texlive-fonts-extra texlive-latex-extra

I also downloaded locally installed the two suggested fonts to /usr/local/share/fonts/truetype/

Build took a few minutes on an older box, but looks spiffy.

Re: Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs (1996) [pdf]

#90
post #63

The foreword of this book must be the only one I have ever read where I disagree with almost every statement it makes. This doesn't encourage you to carry on, but I have (first couple of chapters), and find the whole structure and direction of the thing inimical to me. It seems to me that this is somewhat like the "dragon book" - people were exposed to it before they had read other better books.

> The foreword of this book must be the only one I have ever read where I disagree with almost every statement it makes.

I just went an reread the forward, and nothing struck me as controversial. Could you elaborate a bit?

Post reply on HN