I was attracted to this book for its promise of advice on learning what you need to know to work in software beyond computer science and programming, I was attracted to this book for its promise of advice on learning what you need to know to work in software beyond computer science and programming, but this book is really only useful for complete beginners. It mostly comprises a basic introduction to Python written for people with absolutely no experience with programming. The advice for what you need to know to work in the field is appropriate for people who have never used source control or a command line interpreter before, and who know nothing about professional software development.
I believe in essence what this book aims to provide is an all-in-one book that reviews topics covered in greater depth in The Pragmatic Programmer, Cracking the Coding Interview, and something like Learning to Program in Python. But this book is scarcely 300 pages long, and it can only treat each topic in the most rudimentary way. Anyone who is at all serious would do better to skip it and just go on to those other three books....more
A very attractive coffee-table book featuring large-format illustrations of HTML and CSS that were up-to-date when the book was written in 2011. If yoA very attractive coffee-table book featuring large-format illustrations of HTML and CSS that were up-to-date when the book was written in 2011. If you're looking for useful intruction, you'll get far, far more from MDN's free online materials....more
Useful review of core SQL commands and basic database design. It includes very little content specific to MySQL, and what is there is quite out of datUseful review of core SQL commands and basic database design. It includes very little content specific to MySQL, and what is there is quite out of date, of course. But as a primer to SQL, it's useful, concise, and well-written. ...more
There are certain basic qualities I look for in a book on a programming language, and if they aren't present, then I don't care if it's amusing. ThoseThere are certain basic qualities I look for in a book on a programming language, and if they aren't present, then I don't care if it's amusing. Those qualities include a sound, consistent approach, clarity, commented examples that are easy to follow and illustrative of the features they demonstrate, and certain basics of writing, such as "Don't introduce multiple new ideas in a single example."
Of the many books and resources I've seen on JavaScript and Node to date, Haverbeke's book is by far the most deficient in these fundamentals. I can only sigh in exasperation, trying to figure out what he's talking about with his were-squirrel correlation tracking routine, and I can only throw up my hands in disgust, puzzling through his presentation of promises, where he uses a convoluted and extended example of crows using computers in their nests. Hilarious as that image might be (Imagine! Birds programming asynchronously!), the result is that for every such line he writes, I have to figure out for myself how his nonsense examples relate to anything anyone would actually do, and I have to parse each line to figure out if it's part of the joke or contains actual information.
What if instead of analyzing a crow communication network, Haberbeke had talked about interacting with a relational database, and referenced commonly-used libraries and frameworks? Or would that have been to boring?
It's nice to be amusing, but it's necessary to be clear and helpful. This is not the first well-regarded programming book that I've found to be incompetently written, but it's one of the worst.
Update: I would like to note how very many reviews of this book I have seen by people who said something like "Yes, I didn't myself actually understand a lot of it and was often confused, but I can see that it is very well-written."
I think this points to a pervasive problem with how programming books are received - especially books that have acquired an aura of good reputation. Readers who don't understand them assume the fault must lie in themselves - they are simply not equal to the technical challenges.
That may sometimes be true, but I think we should perhaps all ask more from authors of programming books. The strong majority of those that I have read are very badly written, and to any reader, I would say if you make a real effort to engage with a book and still come away confused, and you have a general understanding of programming and languages, most of the time the problem is with the book, not with you....more
Very useful supplement to more practical introductions to JS like the O'Reilly Definitive Guide. Simpson's introduction takes a high-level conceptual Very useful supplement to more practical introductions to JS like the O'Reilly Definitive Guide. Simpson's introduction takes a high-level conceptual look at the nuts and bolts of JavaScript with an eye toward alerting the novice to the importance of understanding how things work.
In particular, he promotes a paradigm for JS programming that he describes as going "with the grain". As I understand it, that basically means understanding how JavaScript works and thinking about programming in terms of its actual mechanics rather than the surface it presents. In one important example, he effectively argues that JS simulates class inheritance when what is really going on is object delegation, and he recommends understanding inheritance in terms of prototypes connecting various objects rather than falling into the trap of thinking about it in more conventional OOP terms.
I'm not qualified at this point to judge that approach, but I have to say on a theoretical level alone I found it extremely persuasive.
Every programming language should have books like this. The effect of reading it is like being introduced by a knowledgeable friend to the quirks and basics of a new language. It is most certainly not a comprehensive general introduction, but fulfills a valuable role. I look forward to reading more of Simpson's books.
Two minor complaints. First, wow, is it expensive - I paid 23 � for this breezy < 130 page book. That is too much. Second, the handful of exercises are not particularly illuminating and are underexplained.
Update: Hm, I may have over-valued the novelty of Simpson's approach. The MDN Web Docs are also very clear about JS's character as a prototype-based language, saying, for example:
"JavaScript classes, introduced in ECMAScript 2015, are primarily syntactical sugar over JavaScript's existing prototype-based inheritance. The class syntax does not introduce a new object-oriented inheritance model to JavaScript."
They actually get this across with a bit less hand-waving. ...more
Of the JavaScript books I've looked at, this is the one I would recommend to any and all people getting started with the language.
On the plus side, iOf the JavaScript books I've looked at, this is the one I would recommend to any and all people getting started with the language.
On the plus side, it is comprehensive, systematic, clear, and generally well-written. I am amazed how often even classic books on programming languages are stuffed with basic errors, such as presupposing information they have not yet explained, not commenting code samples, or introducing multiple concepts at the same time. This volume is free of such errors.
On the negative side, it is systematic and consistent to a fault, always working methodically from basic concepts up to higher-level ideas. This is a good fit with its comprehensive scope, but it comes at a significant cost. Pedagogically speaking, the best way to introduce a new idea is usually to give practical examples and to walk through them. In some chapters, it takes many pages to get to the first concrete illustration of any practical code - in particular, I think of the crucial and very long chapter on client programming.
I found that the author's uniform adherence to a systematic exposition often made ideas more difficult to assimilate, and I sometimes had to put the book down and go to other tutorials for an introduction to ideas that immediately answered my key questions. In my view, all technical documentation whatsoever should begin by answering the questions "What is it?" and "What does it do?"
Despite its liabilities, which make it in some ways more useful as a reference than a practical introduction, as I said I would recommend this book to literally any programmer getting started with JavaScript. Its virtues are considerable, and I have no doubt I will return to it again and again....more
This brisk essay explores the problem of communicative action in the light of digital communication. Han concurs with Habermas's diagnosis that communThis brisk essay explores the problem of communicative action in the light of digital communication. Han concurs with Habermas's diagnosis that communicative action is not currently possible online, because the Internet does not form a public sphere, but instead a discourse environment that is entirely novel. Instead of people coming together to rationally disagree in coffee houses, we have a galaxy of bloggers speaking mostly to themselves. Such conditions lend themselves to certain kinds of flash-in-the-pan mass actions, but not the formation of ideology.
Rather than stopping there at a point of sour nostalgia for the vanished old mechanism of European political consensus formation, Han attempts to characterize what type of digital democracy might emerge in light of mass electronic communication. Such a democracy would be based on the instantaneous and additive power of ideology-free dynamic communities of actors, which he terms "swarms."
As a product of pure theory, Han's theory might sound a bit arbitrary, were it not such an excellent fit with various characterizations of the dynamics and character of digital political action, such as those described by the Harvard Berkman Center for Internet and Society. I am convinced that online activism and civic participation is indeed post-ideological in the way that Han describes on the basis of empirical research, and like Han, I'm deeply ambivalent about what the implies.
Han continues to be a provocative and engaging thinker with some arresting ideas. I was stopped dead in my tracks, for example, by his contention that each new form of information technology entails its own new dimension of unconsciousness. In the light of modern information-processing models of the unconscious, this is likely literally true, and has fascinating implications. ...more
This book is an invaluable aid to any technical writer. It's written specifically for Microsoft-sanctioned products, of course, but it will be useful This book is an invaluable aid to any technical writer. It's written specifically for Microsoft-sanctioned products, of course, but it will be useful to anyone looking for a methodically-conceived and persuasive set of guidelines for organizing and presenting technical information. It contains basic guidelines for organization and style, such as parallel construction, active voice, and simple, clear parsimony of expression, as well as more advanced rules dealing with thorny cases like dealing with always-lower-case tool or command names, when they may occur at the beginning of a sentence.
So far I've not yet had a problem that it hasn't covered, and 99% of the time I agree with their reasoned and aesthetically-sound recommendations. ...more
Would be better titled "Linux and the Unix Platitudes."
Most everything of value can be absorbed from the table of contents, which presents some insigWould be better titled "Linux and the Unix Platitudes."
Most everything of value can be absorbed from the table of contents, which presents some insight into Linux architecture in a series of aphoristic slogans. Many of them are thought-provoking, though it should be noted they're also not original to the author, who provides a "commentary" of sorts, with a lot of hand waving. The book could be profitably reduced to a page of truisms, like "Learn by doing," "Done is better than perfect," "Small is beautiful," "Form follows function," and so forth.
I found its tone off-putting - it borders on berating the reader - and its perspective relatively unenlightening. Seriously, just read this instead: ...more
Loading...
