OK, I've got a confession to make. I like programming and I've been
programming since I was a kid, but I'm not a CS grad. So I didn't go
through the formal introduction and theory foundation of CS.
Learning Lisp has been very interesting for me because it "brings me
back to the source". I come to know more about the history of CS, and
about the other branch of programming languages. Recently I found that
the book (SICP) is mentioned a number of times whenever I'm reading
Lisp-related material.
I'm thinking of going through the book cover-to-cover. My question
is--do you think it's worth investing time & effort to go through this
book? Or should I just stick to PCL and On Lisp, which I'm reading in
parallel right now?
Thanks!
Ray
Ray wrote:
> Recently I found that
> the book (SICP) is mentioned a number of times whenever I'm reading
> Lisp-related material.
>
> I'm thinking of going through the book cover-to-cover. My question
> is--do you think it's worth investing time & effort to go through this
> book? Or should I just stick to PCL and On Lisp, which I'm reading in
> parallel right now?
At some point, you should read SICP. Whether that's early or late in
your journey is up to you. MIT's 6.001 (a course of the same name as
the book) lectures and other course materials are available for free
download on the web.
Start here, and use the torrents if you can:
http://www.swiss.ai.mit.edu/classes/6.001/abelson-sussman-lectures/
IMO, SICP will be more valuable than OnLisp for a newbie (as I am),
but that opinion may be colored by my personal learning style, and
not reflective of a natural fact. PCL and Graham's ANSI Common Lisp
were more accessible to me, but if I had to do it all over again, I'd
read PCL alongside SICP (with SICP being the "denser" text, and PCL
a much lighter read, so I'd switch off depending on my mood), and
save OnLisp for later.
Jim Sokoloff wrote:
> At some point, you should read SICP. Whether that's early or late in
> your journey is up to you. MIT's 6.001 (a course of the same name as
> the book) lectures and other course materials are available for free
> download on the web.
>
> Start here, and use the torrents if you can:
> http://www.swiss.ai.mit.edu/classes/6.001/abelson-sussman-lectures/
This is priceless. Thank you!!!
> IMO, SICP will be more valuable than OnLisp for a newbie (as I am),
> but that opinion may be colored by my personal learning style, and
> not reflective of a natural fact. PCL and Graham's ANSI Common Lisp
> were more accessible to me, but if I had to do it all over again, I'd
> read PCL alongside SICP (with SICP being the "denser" text, and PCL
> a much lighter read, so I'd switch off depending on my mood), and
> save OnLisp for later.
I find that OnLisp really piques my curiosity--Paul Graham really knows
how to write a book. But I agree with you it is a bit tough in some
parts, it reminds me of reading Bruce Eckel's Using C++ as my second
C++ book--it was tough but nice tough kinda thing :)
Good point you make though, I'll print SICP and start reading tonight.
Thanks,
Ray
Jim Sokoloff ha escrito:
> lectures and other course materials are available for free
> download on the web.
>
They are available at Google video too:
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=structure+and+interpretation+of+computer+programs
Cheers, Mariano
Ray wrote:
> OK, I've got a confession to make. I like programming and I've been
> programming since I was a kid, but I'm not a CS grad. So I didn't go
> through the formal introduction and theory foundation of CS.
>
> Learning Lisp has been very interesting for me because it "brings me
> back to the source". I come to know more about the history of CS, and
> about the other branch of programming languages. Recently I found that
> the book (SICP) is mentioned a number of times whenever I'm reading
> Lisp-related material.
>
> I'm thinking of going through the book cover-to-cover. My question
> is--do you think it's worth investing time & effort to go through this
> book? Or should I just stick to PCL and On Lisp, which I'm reading in
> parallel right now?
I wouldn't read the whole thing. Just dig into it for information when
you need to.
I've tried to read various programming books cover-to-cover, it takes a
long time and isn't very useful because many of the issues you don't
properly understand until you come across them.
The SICP website is very good:-
http://mitpress.mit.edu/sicp/
Rob Thorpe wrote:
> I wouldn't read the whole thing. Just dig into it for information when
> you need to.
> I've tried to read various programming books cover-to-cover, it takes a
> long time and isn't very useful because many of the issues you don't
> properly understand until you come across them.
Thanks Rob, I'm not sure if I can dig into it as I choose though, I've
taken a look at the link you gave below, and it seems that the book
follows a certain progression? Anyway I'll start with Chapter 1 tonight
and see--always good to huddle with a classic book like this :)
> The SICP website is very good:-
> http://mitpress.mit.edu/sicp/
Indeed!
Regards,
Ray
From: Bill Atkins
Subject: Re: Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs--Worth It?
Date:
Message-ID: <m264di2iqm.fsf@bertrand.local>
"Rob Thorpe" <·······@realworldtech.com> writes:
> I wouldn't read the whole thing. Just dig into it for information when
> you need to.
> I've tried to read various programming books cover-to-cover, it takes a
> long time and isn't very useful because many of the issues you don't
> properly understand until you come across them.
I don't know - I enjoyed reading it cover-to-cover. After chapter 3,
you can't skip around too much anyway, since you're basically writing
and rewriting the same program - a Scheme evaluator.
From: Thomas A. Russ
Subject: Re: Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs--Worth It?
Date:
Message-ID: <ymiac2tq4mr.fsf@sevak.isi.edu>
"Ray" <··········@yahoo.com> writes:
> OK, I've got a confession to make. I like programming and I've been
> programming since I was a kid, but I'm not a CS grad. So I didn't go
> through the formal introduction and theory foundation of CS.
>
> Learning Lisp has been very interesting for me because it "brings me
> back to the source". I come to know more about the history of CS, and
> about the other branch of programming languages. Recently I found that
> the book (SICP) is mentioned a number of times whenever I'm reading
> Lisp-related material.
>
> I'm thinking of going through the book cover-to-cover. My question
> is--do you think it's worth investing time & effort to go through this
> book? Or should I just stick to PCL and On Lisp, which I'm reading in
> parallel right now?
Well, it really depends on what you are after. SICP is a great book in
that it is very literate and also handles some deep issues. In fact, I
think that there is a lot in the book that one can only really
appreciate after having had a fair bit of experience programming.
If your goal is to fill in some of the theoretical background and to
also expand your way of thinking about programming, then it would be a
great book to read. It is much less of a how-to programming book than a
look at the nature of programming and decisions that need to be made
when considering how to structure programs and interpret (or give them)
their semantics.
--
Thomas A. Russ, USC/Information Sciences Institute
Thomas A. Russ wrote:
> Well, it really depends on what you are after. SICP is a great book in
> that it is very literate and also handles some deep issues. In fact, I
> think that there is a lot in the book that one can only really
> appreciate after having had a fair bit of experience programming.
>
> If your goal is to fill in some of the theoretical background and to
> also expand your way of thinking about programming, then it would be a
> great book to read. It is much less of a how-to programming book than a
> look at the nature of programming and decisions that need to be made
> when considering how to structure programs and interpret (or give them)
> their semantics.
Hi Thomas, yes, that's exactly my goal, i.e.: to fill the "holes" in my
theoretical background. Thanks for the info!
Regards,
Ray
>
> --
> Thomas A. Russ, USC/Information Sciences Institute
From: Dmitry V. Gorbatovsky
Subject: Re: Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs--Worth It?
Date:
Message-ID: <ejcbg1$143$1@aioe.server.aioe.org>
Ray wrote:
> OK, I've got a confession to make. I like programming and I've been
> programming since I was a kid, but I'm not a CS grad. So I didn't go
> through the formal introduction and theory foundation of CS.
>
> Learning Lisp has been very interesting for me because it "brings me
> back to the source". I come to know more about the history of CS, and
> about the other branch of programming languages. Recently I found that
> the book (SICP) is mentioned a number of times whenever I'm reading
> Lisp-related material.
>
> I'm thinking of going through the book cover-to-cover. My question
> is--do you think it's worth investing time & effort to go through this
> book? Or should I just stick to PCL and On Lisp, which I'm reading in
> parallel right now?
>
> Thanks!
> Ray
My although thin experience suggest me to start writing.
It seems that with Lisp you may change any of your
"not so lisp" code and even basic architectural design
much latter on the course.
Cheers,Dmitry
Dmitry V. Gorbatovsky wrote:
> My although thin experience suggest me to start writing.
> It seems that with Lisp you may change any of your
> "not so lisp" code and even basic architectural design
> much latter on the course.
You mean writing Lisp code? Yeah I'm doing that, although until now
it's still in the capacity of trying out the sample code from PCL :)
But yeah I get what you mean. Instead of thinking endlessly about the
Lispiest way to do something, I should just practice Lisp right away.
Thanks!
Ray
>
> Cheers,Dmitry
From: Dmitry V. Gorbatovsky
Subject: Re: Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs--Worth It?
Date:
Message-ID: <ejcqp7$cb6$1@aioe.server.aioe.org>
Ray wrote:
>
> Dmitry V. Gorbatovsky wrote:
>> My although thin experience suggest me to start writing.
>Ray wrote:
> You mean writing Lisp code?
I am afraid both meaning has their parts ... :)
Regards, Dmitry