Message-ID: <39F6FA51.4C5D9D9@antlimited.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 16:20:49 +0100
From: Richard Heathfield <richard AT antlimited DOT com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.14-5.0 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: alt.comp.lang.learn.c-c++,comp.os.msdos.djgpp,comp.programming
Subject: Re: Undertaking a programming journey
References: <MOqE5.2173$W31 DOT 29870 AT news1 DOT online DOT no> <8scg36$gsm$1 AT nnrp1 DOT deja DOT com> <39E9CF07 DOT 785C0C0F AT eton DOT powernet DOT co DOT uk> <8scls9$kth$1 AT nnrp1 DOT deja DOT com> <rgnjusgvadc5q9d53jticrrgdthc9af3lv AT 4ax DOT com> <39E9FAD5 DOT DE1FDAE4 AT eton DOT powernet DOT co DOT uk> <8sdrub$h7u$1 AT nnrp1 DOT deja DOT com> <njPI5.7153$e5 DOT 18270 AT newsfeeds DOT bigpond DOT com> <39F6132C DOT CA47EEB6 AT bluedog DOT apana DOT org DOT au> <kqsdvs0a69sh2u5f3q8oofdpa52d2hq6aj AT 4ax DOT com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: fb-ext.ant.co.uk
X-Trace: 25 Oct 2000 16:17:20 GMT, fb-ext.ant.co.uk
Lines: 42
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Damian Yerrick wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 25 Oct 2000 09:54:36 +1100, Jason Stokes
> <jstok AT bluedog DOT apana DOT org DOT au> wrote:
> 
> >From the standpoint of an engineer who is used to evaluating
> >*tradeoffs*, might it be arguable that an *on balance* argument
> >might be made, to wit, that a Schildt book that has been written
> >quite elegantly and accessibly, yet contains the occasional error
> 
> "Occasional error" my foot.  I challenge you to find _one_ source code
> example in a Schildt book that doesn't contain an error.
> 
> `void main()' is an error.

Right.

> 
> >might not be considered preferable to a book which is scrupulously
> >correct, yet written in such Stroustroupish turgidness that all
> >first-years who have had the misfortune to be exposed to it defect
> >to something nice and easy like media studies?
> 
> That's why there's the "For Dummies(R)" series of books from IDG.

If I understand you correctly, you are arguing that "C For Dummies" is
scrupulously correct, but not Stroustrupishly turgid. If so, I would
agree with the latter, but not the former, description. "C For Dummies"
is yet another void main() book.

http://users.powernet.co.uk/eton/clc/cbooks.html contains a list of good
C tutorial books (as well as some good C reference books). Regrettably,
the list is very short. (I don't claim it's exhaustive, by the way -
it's just a list of books frequently recommended by comp.lang.c
regulars.)


-- 
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