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

Algorithms by Jeff Erickson

jeffe.cs.illinois.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 162 posts

Re: Algorithms by Jeff Erickson

#91

Post by azhenley »

squeaky-clean wrote: post #87
comeonseriously wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The right thing to do..." No. He's the author, this is his choice. People who don't take his course don't have to use the book.

Unless this is a book the author wrote solely to enjoy themselves, let's not pretend that feedback from potential buyers is something that shouldn't be allowed.

The content is posted for free. If you buy it, you are paying for a physical copy of free material.

PDF of the book: http://jeffe.cs.illinois.edu/teaching/algorithms/book/Algori...

Re: Algorithms by Jeff Erickson

#92

Post by oplav »

reasonabl_human wrote: post #67
jtokoph wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All of the X73 classes were defining for me. Probably my favorite classes and ones that changed the way my brain works.

For someone out of the UIUC construct, does X73 mean various levels of algorithms courses? Could you elaborate on their titles or content? I am looking to self-study for core CS content that I missed out on in school after being largely self-taught, and courses that change the way one’s brain works sound like the right ones to take.

Yes, the X73 courses were theory based. Something changed after I graduated and now I think CS 374 is the algorithms course, but I'm not sure.

If you want to start with the fundamentals, CS 173 (Discrete Structures) is required of all undergrad CS majors and is the first of the sequence (usually taken as a freshman/sophomore). The book is available online along with problems/solutions: http://mfleck.cs.illinois.edu/building-blocks/index.html

Re: Algorithms by Jeff Erickson

#93

Post by trevor-e »

aspaceman wrote: post #38
codeisawesome wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMO it’s a major waste of time to go through a book if I can’t check my solutions and be satisfied that I understood everything the instructor intended to from the problem. I won’t be investing the time into this book. Algorithms by Sedgwick instead has (third party) Solutions online.

You can still get value from a book that doesn’t give you all the answers. You can even get more value. Christ the answers have been all solved in papers, in literature, it’s all out there in small baby words what to do. But the whole damn point of math is learning to do it on your own. It’s like bitching that an art textbook doesn’t include draw by numbers in the back pages. “I just want to know I’m doing it right“…

> And I love that the problems remain difficult and meaningful

And there it is, your argument comes down to gatekeeping.

If all the problems have been publicly solved, as you said, then what's the harm of having a solutions guide? The cheaters can already find what they're looking for and it helps the self-learners who are actually trying to learn.

Re: Algorithms by Jeff Erickson

#94

Post by vajrabum »

squeaky-clean wrote: post #87
comeonseriously wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The right thing to do..." No. He's the author, this is his choice. People who don't take his course don't have to use the book.

Unless this is a book the author wrote solely to enjoy themselves, let's not pretend that feedback from potential buyers is something that shouldn't be allowed.

Professors frequently write their own textbooks. Sometimes these are only used in their own classrooms. That's pretty close to their own enjoyment. It allows them to have a book that exactly matches the way they want to teach. As far as buyers, this book is free.

Re: Algorithms by Jeff Erickson

#95

Post by sigjuice »

squeaky-clean wrote: post #87
comeonseriously wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The right thing to do..." No. He's the author, this is his choice. People who don't take his course don't have to use the book.

Unless this is a book the author wrote solely to enjoy themselves, let's not pretend that feedback from potential buyers is something that shouldn't be allowed.

The author has responded to this feedback on the website in great detail. At this point, this is less of feedback and more of entitled people demanding that the author write another book.

Re: Algorithms by Jeff Erickson

#96

Post by deliveryboyman »

aspaceman wrote: post #38
codeisawesome wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMO it’s a major waste of time to go through a book if I can’t check my solutions and be satisfied that I understood everything the instructor intended to from the problem. I won’t be investing the time into this book. Algorithms by Sedgwick instead has (third party) Solutions online.

You can still get value from a book that doesn’t give you all the answers. You can even get more value. Christ the answers have been all solved in papers, in literature, it’s all out there in small baby words what to do. But the whole damn point of math is learning to do it on your own. It’s like bitching that an art textbook doesn’t include draw by numbers in the back pages. “I just want to know I’m doing it right“…

While I agree with you, you have to remember who the HN audience is. There's a reason why the top voted comment in any thread about math is someone asking for solutions.

Re: Algorithms by Jeff Erickson

#97

Post by ChrisLomont »

tdudzik wrote: post #72
dkfjs wrote: post #49

Not proving solutions to textbooks seems to be a common theme in mathematics and theoretical computer science. It makes it difficult for those outside of the traditional classroom to learn the material. Instead textbook writers seem to have this adversarial approach against readers, thinking they’ll “cheat themselves” if they look up solutions or attempt to verify their work. Experts make mistakes, beginners would pr…

It's kind of insulting to assume that students are unable to decide what's good for them. If someone wants to cheat, he/she will do it anyway. Not providing solutions harms people that really want to learn the material.

>It's kind of insulting to assume that students are unable to decide what's good for them.

It's also kind of insulting to assume that teachers with decades of experience don't know how students behave.

Student cheating or working is not binary; it's a continuum. There are plenty of students in the middle of that continuum that will copy answers and not learn if answer are easily available, but that would do the work if answers are not available, and those students are better off having to put in effort when they don't have easy answers.

Re: Algorithms by Jeff Erickson

#98

Post by weaksauce »

it's a bit of a shame that the comments here have descended into a quibble over the availability of the solutions to the questions for each of the sections. All the while overlooking just how excellent the source material is written and also overlooking the fact that this is an entire textbook on college level algorithms that is being gifted away for free instead of locked behind a 150-200 dollar paywall at the bookstore.

to Jeff Erickson: Thanks for the book

Re: Algorithms by Jeff Erickson

#99

Post by stevegalla »

matsemann wrote: post #28
asicsp wrote: post #5

From https://jeffe.cs.illinois.edu/teaching/algorithms/hwex.html#... > Please do not ask me for solutions. With very rare exceptions, I will say no, even if you are an instructor. I recognize that my stance limits the utility of these materials, especially for self-learners, but I'm trying to optimize the learning experience of my own students at Illinois. The point of homework is not to solve that particular homewor…

While I get this stance (the books are often written with students in mind), it's sometimes a bit hard when reading this kind of material while not enrolled. I don't have any TAs, professors, peers etc to ask or grade my stuff when working my way through a text book in my spare time. How can I be sure I understood stuff correctly? For me it's ok, I guess. I have graduated years ago and it's strictly for fun. But I wo…

> I don't have any TAs, professors, peers etc to ask or grade my stuff when working my way through a text book in my spare time. How can I be sure I understood stuff correctly?

I definitely agree with you on this. However, there are three things self-learners (or even students) can do.

1. Find a textbook with worked solutions or a different presentation of material.

2. Look for course material that has problem sets with solutions, worked tutorials, or worked examples.

3. Learn numerical or other methods to evaluate your solutions. I know this isn’t possible for proofs, but if it’s an algorithm’s run time, I don’t see how implementing the algorithm and plotting run times over different input sizes wouldn’t be a good way to see if you have the correct run time.

Re: Algorithms by Jeff Erickson

#100

Post by skrtskrt »

unishark wrote: post #58
dkfjs wrote: post #49

Not proving solutions to textbooks seems to be a common theme in mathematics and theoretical computer science. It makes it difficult for those outside of the traditional classroom to learn the material. Instead textbook writers seem to have this adversarial approach against readers, thinking they’ll “cheat themselves” if they look up solutions or attempt to verify their work. Experts make mistakes, beginners would pr…

> Instead textbook writers seem to have this adversarial approach against readers, thinking they’ll “cheat themselves” if they look up solutions or attempt to verify their work. I agree that worked problems make a text much more valuable and useful; even students in a class may spend a lot of time doing self-study. And for self-study, without worked problems the book is only useful as a reference while working proble…

In college, cheating on the homeworks was quite literally the only way to get all the work for 4 engineering classes done on time.

We still learned it all for exams, and received our exam grades accordingly, which are generally >60% of the full grade for the class.

But we were putting in 80+ hours a week on engineering classes and it simply wasn't enough for the obscene amount of work professors assigned. Students crying, having breakdowns, and pulling their hair out in the library and in the classroom was pretty common.

Post reply on HN