Mail Archives: djgpp/2000/10/24/14:14:58
ChuckEasttom wrote:
>
> In article <39F52E56 DOT C516F9EF AT eton DOT powernet DOT co DOT uk>,
> Richard Heathfield <binary AT eton DOT powernet DOT co DOT uk> wrote:
> > ChuckEasttom wrote:
> > >
> > Well, I can see why you would not treat Mr Steward's opinion terribly
> > seriously. Nevertheless, even though he is somewhat forthright, he
> does
> > have a point about Schildt, as has already been discussed not only by
> us
> > but by a million C programmers before us.
> >
>
> Welll I would say a million is a bit of an exaggeration.
Nope. As I've told you a trillion times, I *never* exaggerate.
> However Mr.
> Stewards opinion seems to be (note I say 'seems to be') this: Schildts
> books do have mistakes, ergo if you like schildt at all then you are an
> incompetent programmer. I personally think that is a tremendous leap
> of thinking with very little logical basis.
I'm less concerned with Mr Steward's opinion than I am with protecting
learner programmers from certain kinds of bad programming practice, as
promulgated by several of Mr Schildt's books.
>
> > > I have
> > > never said that Schildt was a great author or that his books where
> > > perfect.
> >
> > No, you haven't. Nevertheless, I think you may have failed to
> understand
> > the sheer levels of incompetence to which Mr Schildt's programs
> strive.
> > I gave you an example recently, I believe. It's by no means atypical.
>
> To be frank I have never tried to run any of his sample code. I used
> his books in my early days of learning C and C++ to quickly get the
> concepts. Everyone has admitted that his writting style is very good.
> I found, and still feel, that this writting style allowed him to
> quickly and efficiently present programming concepts in a very clear
> manner. Thats all, no more and no less.
That's fine as far as it goes, but it doesn't go far enough. We must ask
ourselves not only whether he is clear (which he is) but whether he is
correct (which he often is, but all too often is not). How is a newbie
to tell the difference between what is right and what is wrong? Well, he
must trust the author. In this respect, Mr Schildt's explanations of C
language principles are not trustworthy. If he listened to criticism and
posted corrections on the Web, that would go an enormous way toward
restoring his reputation. But he doesn't.
> > > I do feel that he does a good job of presenting concepts in a
> > > very easily understood manner.
> >
> > Right. He does. Unfortunately, his explanations, though easily
> > understood, are /flawed/. Let me find you an example - I shan't be
> long,
> > I promise you!...
>
> It does not matter what example you find. I have not once said anything
> one way or another about the sample code in his books.
My example was not source code. It was text.
> You are arguing a point,I have not made.
You made the point that he explains things clearly. I made the point
that he explains things incorrectly, and my example was designed to
establish evidence of that fact. It was not a code sample; it was an
exegetic sample of the kind you said was so clear. It was taken more or
less at random from a Schildt book. And it was incorrect.
> <snip irrelevant example>
Not quite so irrelevant, IMHO.
<snip>
> > It doesn't bother me if you like Schildt, but (if you value your
> > reputation) I think you'd be well-advised to steer clear of
> recommending
> > him to others in a newsgroup where technical accuracy is a concern, or
> > you will attract many more mini-flames such as Mr D Steward's.
> >
>
> Frankly speaking I am seeing more and more people in this newsgroup who
> seem to boost their own self esteem from frankly attacking other, in
> which case I find it hard to really care what such people think of my
> reputation. My reputation remains intact with those who have:
> a. Actually worked with me
> b. Employed me
> c. Or met me in person.
You seem to be taking this as an ad hominum attack. Well, in a way it
is, but the hominum in question is Mr Schildt, not you, and I justify
the attack on factual grounds; it is not a mere diatribe. I have tried
to be fair not only to you but to Mr Schildt as well - in the latter
case, I have done this by pointing out what steps he could take to
restore his reputation. Indeed, for all I know he may be a reformed
character. The proof of the pudding is in his Errata page. Does he have
one yet?
>
> If someone on the net does not like me or respect me I can hardly be
> overly distraught about this.
Most normal people would prefer to be liked and respected on the Net
than the opposite. But you're right not to get too wound up about it. I
know it's probably heretical to suggest this, but Usenet is *not* a
vital ingredient of life.
That's torn it - do you know any good hiding places? :-)
--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place." - Dennis M Ritchie, 29 July 1999.
C FAQ: http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html
K&R Answers: http://users.powernet.co.uk/eton/kandr2/index.html
- Raw text -