Groups > alt.folklore.computers > #161395 > unrolled thread

Which Books Can You Recommend For Learning Computer Programming?

Started by	Neo Fortune <serenity3043@gmail.com>
First post	2016-03-23 02:31 -0700
Last post	2016-03-30 14:56 +0100
Articles	20 on this page of 401 — 44 participants

Back to article view | Back to alt.folklore.computers

Page 18 of 21 — ← Prev page 1 … 16 17 [18] 19 20 21 Next page →

#162221

From	hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Date	2016-04-06 16:19 -0700
Message-ID	<8d49c6a0-9977-49cd-a61a-db729d17c494@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#162170

On Tuesday, April 5, 2016 at 5:46:30 PM UTC-4, Peter Flass wrote:

> No, DFSORT has eliminated most (maybe all) the options.  OS/370 SORT used
> to have options to use a number of different sort algorithms depending on
> the number and type of devices (and possibly main storage) available.

I was thinking of the popular commercial product, SYNCSORT, which
seemed to be used by many mainframe sites.

From their documentation it seems it still has numerous options:

"Syncsort MFX optimization procedures dynamically monitor
and respond to system status, including CPU utilization, DASD
contention, controller caching, central storage availability, paging
rates and the specific make and model computer MFX is running
on. MFX also exploits advanced parallel access volume (PAV)
technology to minimize the elapsed time of sort executions."

http://www.syncsort.com/CMSPages/GetFile.aspx?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#164161

From	Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com>
Date	2016-05-31 11:34 -0400
Message-ID	<xNKdnRuS0OKZMtDKnZ2dnUU7-U3NnZ2d@supernews.com>
In reply to	#161565

Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> writes:

> On Tue, 29 Mar 2016 01:45:09 -0700, Neo Fortune wrote:
>
>> On Wednesday, March 23, 2016 at 1:17:36 PM UTC, Osmium wrote:
>>> "Neo Fortune" wrote:
>>> 
>>> > There's One In Particular That Covers Different Algorithms
>>> 
>>> _The Art of Computer Programming_ by Donald Knuth is kind of the
>>> ultimate book for serious programmers.  The way your post is phrased, I
>>> think you might be a beginner and so the book might be a bit much. I
>>> suggest you spend a few hours poking around in Wikipedia and try to
>>> focus in a bit more on what you want to do and then posting a revised
>>> question.
>>> 
>>> If you truly are a beginner, a better starting point might be to learn
>>> one of the programming languages. there are a hundred or so.  And a
>>> book on algorithms requires an ability to understand a language.
>>> 
>>> The book mentioned is a multi-volume work in process, the first three
>>> volumes have been around for several years..
>> 
>> Thanks...
>> 
>> The Art of Computer Programming By Donald Knuth Sounds The Ticket
>
> Frankly, it's a bit advanced and mathematical for a beginner. You'd be 
> better off picking a language (perhaps Python) and then getting a 
> beginners or Dummies book on it.

I like this book:

http://knuth.luther.edu/~leekent/IntroToComputing/

It teaches you the important concepts of "computer science" and
programming while it's teaching you Python.

He also wrote this one and one of my friends has mentioned it as being
quite good:

https://www.springer.com/us/book/9783319130712

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161571

From	scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
Date	2016-03-29 13:13 +0000
Message-ID	<icvKy.64374$bB1.52056@fx30.iad>
In reply to	#161564

Neo Fortune <serenity3043@gmail.com> writes:
>On Wednesday, March 23, 2016 at 1:17:36 PM UTC, Osmium wrote:
>> "Neo Fortune" wrote:
>> 
>> > There's One In Particular That Covers Different Algorithms
>> 
>> _The Art of Computer Programming_ by Donald Knuth is kind of the ultimate 
>> book for serious programmers.  The way your post is phrased, I think you 
>> might be a beginner and so the book might be a bit much. I suggest you spend 
>> a few hours poking around in Wikipedia and try to focus in a bit more on 
>> what you want to do and then posting a revised question.
>> 
>> If you truly are a beginner, a better starting point might be to learn one 
>> of the programming languages. there are a hundred or so.  And a book on 
>> algorithms requires an ability to understand a language.
>> 
>> The book mentioned is a multi-volume work in process, the first three 
>> volumes have been around for several years..
>
>Thanks...
>
>The Art of Computer Programming By Donald Knuth Sounds The Ticket

Or Horowitz and Sahni - Fundamentals of Computer Algorithms.  Accompanied by
   Horowitz and Sahni - Fundamentals of Data Structures.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sartaj_Sahni

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161572

From	"Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net>
Date	2016-03-29 08:44 -0600
Message-ID	<dlvf5tFmd3cU1@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#161571

<scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote in message 
news:icvKy.64374$bB1.52056@fx30.iad...
> Neo Fortune <serenity3043@gmail.com> writes:
>>On Wednesday, March 23, 2016 at 1:17:36 PM UTC, Osmium wrote:
>>> "Neo Fortune" wrote:
>>>
>>> > There's One In Particular That Covers Different Algorithms
>>>
>>> _The Art of Computer Programming_ by Donald Knuth is kind of the 
>>> ultimate
>>> book for serious programmers.  The way your post is phrased, I think you
>>> might be a beginner and so the book might be a bit much. I suggest you 
>>> spend
>>> a few hours poking around in Wikipedia and try to focus in a bit more on
>>> what you want to do and then posting a revised question.
>>>
>>> If you truly are a beginner, a better starting point might be to learn 
>>> one
>>> of the programming languages. there are a hundred or so.  And a book on
>>> algorithms requires an ability to understand a language.
>>>
>>> The book mentioned is a multi-volume work in process, the first three
>>> volumes have been around for several years..
>>
>>Thanks...
>>
>>The Art of Computer Programming By Donald Knuth Sounds The Ticket
>
> Or Horowitz and Sahni - Fundamentals of Computer Algorithms.  Accompanied 
> by
>   Horowitz and Sahni - Fundamentals of Data Structures.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sartaj_Sahni

I have that book, too.  But that just picks at the one part of algorithms 
typically taught in a Computer Science course, data structures. 
*Algorithms* includes a lot more  than data structures.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161604

From	Mike Spencer <mspencer@tallships.ca>
Date	2016-03-29 19:25 -0300
Message-ID	<87shz8dir2.fsf@roadgrime.nodomain.nowhere>
In reply to	#161564

Neo Fortune <serenity3043@gmail.com> writes:

> Thanks...
> 
> The Art of Computer Programming By Donald Knuth Sounds The Ticket

Overlooking those who believe that Basic isn't programming, I learned
to program dicking around with Basic on an Apple ][ and an Osborne 1.
Then I read K&R straight through until my head threatened to explode
(near the end, somewhere around struct bitfields) and started to write
C code -- on the Osborne.

Once you have a basic (not Basic) notion of what bits & bytes are, IMHO
K&R will get you   doing interesting things pretty quick.

But then, I'm an amateur (in the best sense), not a professional
hacker. 

-- 
Michael Spencer                  Nova Scotia, Canada       .~. 
                                                           /V\ 
                                                          /( )\
                                                          ^^-^^

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161607

From	Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid>
Date	2016-03-29 23:20 +0000
Message-ID	<ndf2jr1r6t@news4.newsguy.com>
In reply to	#161604

On 2016-03-29, Mike Spencer <mspencer@tallships.ca> wrote:

> Neo Fortune <serenity3043@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Thanks...
>> 
>> The Art of Computer Programming By Donald Knuth Sounds The Ticket
>
> Overlooking those who believe that Basic isn't programming, I learned
> to program dicking around with Basic on an Apple ][ and an Osborne 1.
> Then I read K&R straight through until my head threatened to explode
> (near the end, somewhere around struct bitfields) and started to write
> C code -- on the Osborne.
>
> Once you have a basic (not Basic) notion of what bits & bytes are, IMHO
> K&R will get you   doing interesting things pretty quick.
>
> But then, I'm an amateur (in the best sense), not a professional
> hacker. 

I've always considered myself a professional hacker.  I dropped out of
the university computer science program and got a job in the Real World
pushing bits around - and somehow have always managed to find work.
I'd love to read Knuth some day - I'm sure there's a lot of fascinating
material there.  But in the meantime, I'll write elegant little algorithms
the day the vendors who provide the data I'm crunching decide to write
data structures that are amenable to something other than hacking.
As I used to say at the height of the Structured Programming craze:
"Structured Programming is of limited use against unstructured applications."

-- 
/~\  cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ /  I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
 X   Top-posted messages will probably be ignored.  See RFC1855.
/ \  HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored.  Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161628

From	scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
Date	2016-03-30 13:01 +0000
Message-ID	<a7QKy.110625$X_.47071@fx04.iad>
In reply to	#161604

Mike Spencer <mspencer@tallships.ca> writes:
>
>Neo Fortune <serenity3043@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Thanks...
>> 
>> The Art of Computer Programming By Donald Knuth Sounds The Ticket
>
>Overlooking those who believe that Basic isn't programming, I learned
>to program dicking around with Basic on an Apple ][ and an Osborne 1.
>Then I read K&R straight through until my head threatened to explode
>(near the end, somewhere around struct bitfields) and started to write
>C code -- on the Osborne.
>
>Once you have a basic (not Basic) notion of what bits & bytes are, IMHO
>K&R will get you   doing interesting things pretty quick.

Instead of K&R, I'd recommend K&P:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Elements_of_Programming_Style

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161629

From	Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx>
Date	2016-03-30 13:12 +0000
Message-ID	<dm21m2FflomU16@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#161628

On Wed, 30 Mar 2016 13:01:58 +0000, Scott Lurndal wrote:

> Mike Spencer <mspencer@tallships.ca> writes:
>>
>>Neo Fortune <serenity3043@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> Thanks...
>>> 
>>> The Art of Computer Programming By Donald Knuth Sounds The Ticket
>>
>>Overlooking those who believe that Basic isn't programming, I learned to
>>program dicking around with Basic on an Apple ][ and an Osborne 1. Then
>>I read K&R straight through until my head threatened to explode (near
>>the end, somewhere around struct bitfields) and started to write C code
>>-- on the Osborne.
>>
>>Once you have a basic (not Basic) notion of what bits & bytes are, IMHO
>>K&R will get you   doing interesting things pretty quick.
> 
> Instead of K&R, I'd recommend K&P:
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Elements_of_Programming_Style

As an aside from programming, has anyone ever read 'The Elements of 
Networking Style'? Not always an easy read, but a demolition of OSI as 
opposed to TCP/IP etc. Details linked from the author details here:

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_A._Padlipsky




-- 
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...

Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
 http://www.mirrorservice.org

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161641

From	jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com>
Date	2016-03-30 14:06 +0000
Message-ID	<PM00052F44B0C5159C@aca40b23.ipt.aol.com>
In reply to	#161604

Mike Spencer wrote:
>
> Neo Fortune <serenity3043@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Thanks...
>>
>> The Art of Computer Programming By Donald Knuth Sounds The Ticket
>
> Overlooking those who believe that Basic isn't programming, I learned
> to program dicking around with Basic on an Apple ][ and an Osborne 1.
> Then I read K&R straight through until my head threatened to explode
> (near the end, somewhere around struct bitfields) and started to write
> C code -- on the Osborne.
>
> Once you have a basic (not Basic) notion of what bits & bytes are, IMHO
> K&R will get you   doing interesting things pretty quick.
>
> But then, I'm an amateur (in the best sense), not a professional
> hacker.
>

One way to understand programming bits and bytes is to install
an emulator for the PDP-8 and play with it.  Graduating to PDP-10
machines would offer a more complex OS and services.  I don't
recall DEC documenting the algorithms developed for monitor
(kernals) and device/network contollers and devices.
The latter also shows how to do memrory management of all flavors
and buffered mode I/O (which was completely missing from MSoft's
bit bucket).

GETting any EXE on a PDP-10, then DDTing it, gives access
the entire "app" the user has pulled into core.  Just
stepping through the locations using the <LF> character
gives a nice introduction to addresses, contents of
addresses, data, code and bytes.

/BAH

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161642

From	scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
Date	2016-03-30 15:14 +0000
Message-ID	<h3SKy.73542$6%.47175@fx02.iad>
In reply to	#161641

jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> writes:
>Mike Spencer wrote:
>>
>> Neo Fortune <serenity3043@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> Thanks...
>>>
>>> The Art of Computer Programming By Donald Knuth Sounds The Ticket
>>
>> Overlooking those who believe that Basic isn't programming, I learned
>> to program dicking around with Basic on an Apple ][ and an Osborne 1.
>> Then I read K&R straight through until my head threatened to explode
>> (near the end, somewhere around struct bitfields) and started to write
>> C code -- on the Osborne.
>>
>> Once you have a basic (not Basic) notion of what bits & bytes are, IMHO
>> K&R will get you   doing interesting things pretty quick.
>>
>> But then, I'm an amateur (in the best sense), not a professional
>> hacker.
>>
>
>One way to understand programming bits and bytes is to install
>an emulator for the PDP-8 and play with it.  Graduating to PDP-10
>machines would offer a more complex OS and services.  I don't
>recall DEC documenting the algorithms developed for monitor
>(kernals) and device/network contollers and devices.
>The latter also shows how to do memrory management of all flavors
>and buffered mode I/O (which was completely missing from MSoft's
>bit bucket).
>
>GETting any EXE on a PDP-10, then DDTing it, gives access
>the entire "app" the user has pulled into core.  Just
>stepping through the locations using the <LF> character
>gives a nice introduction to addresses, contents of
>addresses, data, code and bytes.

why bother with ancient architectures, when one can obtain
much more relevent data using modern processors and software?

Everything you describe above applies to modern processors.

replace "ddt" with "gdb".

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161647

From	Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com>
Date	2016-03-30 09:15 -0700
Message-ID	<950348948.481046768.067116.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org>
In reply to	#161642

Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote:
> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> writes:
>> Mike Spencer wrote:
>>> 
>>> Neo Fortune <serenity3043@gmail.com> writes:
>>> 
>>>> Thanks...
>>>> 
>>>> The Art of Computer Programming By Donald Knuth Sounds The Ticket
>>> 
>>> Overlooking those who believe that Basic isn't programming, I learned
>>> to program dicking around with Basic on an Apple ][ and an Osborne 1.
>>> Then I read K&R straight through until my head threatened to explode
>>> (near the end, somewhere around struct bitfields) and started to write
>>> C code -- on the Osborne.
>>> 
>>> Once you have a basic (not Basic) notion of what bits & bytes are, IMHO
>>> K&R will get you   doing interesting things pretty quick.
>>> 
>>> But then, I'm an amateur (in the best sense), not a professional
>>> hacker.
>>> 
>> 
>> One way to understand programming bits and bytes is to install
>> an emulator for the PDP-8 and play with it.  Graduating to PDP-10
>> machines would offer a more complex OS and services.  I don't
>> recall DEC documenting the algorithms developed for monitor
>> (kernals) and device/network contollers and devices.
>> The latter also shows how to do memrory management of all flavors
>> and buffered mode I/O (which was completely missing from MSoft's
>> bit bucket).
>> 
>> GETting any EXE on a PDP-10, then DDTing it, gives access
>> the entire "app" the user has pulled into core.  Just
>> stepping through the locations using the <LF> character
>> gives a nice introduction to addresses, contents of
>> addresses, data, code and bytes.
> 
> why bother with ancient architectures, when one can obtain
> much more relevent data using modern processors and software?
> 
> Everything you describe above applies to modern processors.
> 
> replace "ddt" with "gdb".
> 

I wouldn't recommend x86 for anyone just trying to learn computers at the
machine language level.  I don't know ARM, that might be better, but most
modern architectures are much too complex.  I don't care much for the PDP8,
but the -11 might not be a bad place to start.

OTOH, OP said the person wanted to learn programming, so s/he should
probably start with an HLL.  That's one thing to be said for BASIC, the "B"
stands for "beginner's" for a reason.  You can learn most of the basics of
programming without all the complexity.  Interpreters are available for
free for most systems.


-- 
Pete

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161660

From	scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
Date	2016-03-30 16:53 +0000
Message-ID	<7wTKy.66982$bB1.57378@fx30.iad>
In reply to	#161647

Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> writes:
>Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote:
>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> writes:

>>> GETting any EXE on a PDP-10, then DDTing it, gives access
>>> the entire "app" the user has pulled into core.  Just
>>> stepping through the locations using the <LF> character
>>> gives a nice introduction to addresses, contents of
>>> addresses, data, code and bytes.

>> Everything you describe above applies to modern processors.
>> 
>> replace "ddt" with "gdb".
>> 
>
>I wouldn't recommend x86 for anyone just trying to learn computers at the
>machine language level.  I don't know ARM, that might be better, but most
>modern architectures are much too complex.  I don't care much for the PDP8,
>but the -11 might not be a bad place to start.

I think I disagree with this.   x86 is pretty simple from the
point of view of the beginner, and far better than learning on a
segmented system like PDP-11 or a field-based system such as PDP-8.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161696

From	Neo Fortune <serenity3043@gmail.com>
Date	2016-03-31 02:18 -0700
Message-ID	<800a218f-a65d-4871-99ae-0f1e97c596f0@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#161647

On Wednesday, March 30, 2016 at 5:15:01 PM UTC+1, Peter Flass wrote:
> Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote:
> > jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> writes:
> >> Mike Spencer wrote:
> >>> 
> >>> Neo Fortune <serenity3043@gmail.com> writes:
> >>> 
> >>>> Thanks...
> >>>> 
> >>>> The Art of Computer Programming By Donald Knuth Sounds The Ticket
> >>> 
> >>> Overlooking those who believe that Basic isn't programming, I learned
> >>> to program dicking around with Basic on an Apple ][ and an Osborne 1.
> >>> Then I read K&R straight through until my head threatened to explode
> >>> (near the end, somewhere around struct bitfields) and started to write
> >>> C code -- on the Osborne.
> >>> 
> >>> Once you have a basic (not Basic) notion of what bits & bytes are, IMHO
> >>> K&R will get you   doing interesting things pretty quick.
> >>> 
> >>> But then, I'm an amateur (in the best sense), not a professional
> >>> hacker.
> >>> 
> >> 
> >> One way to understand programming bits and bytes is to install
> >> an emulator for the PDP-8 and play with it.  Graduating to PDP-10
> >> machines would offer a more complex OS and services.  I don't
> >> recall DEC documenting the algorithms developed for monitor
> >> (kernals) and device/network contollers and devices.
> >> The latter also shows how to do memrory management of all flavors
> >> and buffered mode I/O (which was completely missing from MSoft's
> >> bit bucket).
> >> 
> >> GETting any EXE on a PDP-10, then DDTing it, gives access
> >> the entire "app" the user has pulled into core.  Just
> >> stepping through the locations using the <LF> character
> >> gives a nice introduction to addresses, contents of
> >> addresses, data, code and bytes.
> > 
> > why bother with ancient architectures, when one can obtain
> > much more relevent data using modern processors and software?
> > 
> > Everything you describe above applies to modern processors.
> > 
> > replace "ddt" with "gdb".
> > 
> 
> I wouldn't recommend x86 for anyone just trying to learn computers at the
> machine language level.  I don't know ARM, that might be better, but most
> modern architectures are much too complex.  I don't care much for the PDP8,
> but the -11 might not be a bad place to start.
> 
> -- 
> Pete

I Remember In The Late 80s Playing Populous On The Amiga

An Article In A Magazine By Peter Molyneux Detailed How He Could Train Anyone To Program A Game In 68K Assembler

http://mrjester.hapisan.com/04_MC68/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161698

From	Morten Reistad <first@Last.name.invalid>
Date	2016-03-30 20:19 +0200
Message-ID	<8uhtsc-6b1.ln1@sambook.reistad.name>
In reply to	#161647

In article <950348948.481046768.067116.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org>,
Peter Flass  <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote:
>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> writes:
>>> Mike Spencer wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Neo Fortune <serenity3043@gmail.com> writes:
>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks...
>>>>> 
>>>>> The Art of Computer Programming By Donald Knuth Sounds The Ticket
>>>> 
>>>> Overlooking those who believe that Basic isn't programming, I learned
>>>> to program dicking around with Basic on an Apple ][ and an Osborne 1.
>>>> Then I read K&R straight through until my head threatened to explode
>>>> (near the end, somewhere around struct bitfields) and started to write
>>>> C code -- on the Osborne.
>>>> 
>>>> Once you have a basic (not Basic) notion of what bits & bytes are, IMHO
>>>> K&R will get you   doing interesting things pretty quick.
>>>> 
>>>> But then, I'm an amateur (in the best sense), not a professional
>>>> hacker.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> One way to understand programming bits and bytes is to install
>>> an emulator for the PDP-8 and play with it.  Graduating to PDP-10
>>> machines would offer a more complex OS and services.  I don't
>>> recall DEC documenting the algorithms developed for monitor
>>> (kernals) and device/network contollers and devices.
>>> The latter also shows how to do memrory management of all flavors
>>> and buffered mode I/O (which was completely missing from MSoft's
>>> bit bucket).
>>> 
>>> GETting any EXE on a PDP-10, then DDTing it, gives access
>>> the entire "app" the user has pulled into core.  Just
>>> stepping through the locations using the <LF> character
>>> gives a nice introduction to addresses, contents of
>>> addresses, data, code and bytes.
>> 
>> why bother with ancient architectures, when one can obtain
>> much more relevent data using modern processors and software?
>> 
>> Everything you describe above applies to modern processors.
>> 
>> replace "ddt" with "gdb".
>> 
>
>I wouldn't recommend x86 for anyone just trying to learn computers at the
>machine language level.  I don't know ARM, that might be better, but most
>modern architectures are much too complex.  I don't care much for the PDP8,
>but the -11 might not be a bad place to start.

ARM, unoptimised, is a lot easier to read than x86, almost to the level
of the pdp10. The problem comes with the thumb/thumb2 "compressed" instructions, 
which is essential to all modern arm optimisation. 

>OTOH, OP said the person wanted to learn programming, so s/he should
>probably start with an HLL.  That's one thing to be said for BASIC, the "B"
>stands for "beginner's" for a reason.  You can learn most of the basics of
>programming without all the complexity.  Interpreters are available for
>free for most systems.

Dabble around in basic, yes. Or even a *n*x shell. But do go for a heavily
structured language too.

-- mrr

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161761

From	mausg@mail.com
Date	2016-03-31 21:32 +0000
Message-ID	<slrnnfr5qt.18t.mausg@Smaus.org>
In reply to	#161698

On 2016-03-30, Morten Reistad <first@Last.name.invalid> wrote:
> In article <950348948.481046768.067116.peter_flass-yahoo.com@news.eternal-september.org>,
> Peter Flass  <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote:
>>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> writes:
>>>> Mike Spencer wrote:
>>>>> 
>>
>>I wouldn't recommend x86 for anyone just trying to learn computers at the
>>machine language level.  I don't know ARM, that might be better, but most
>>modern architectures are much too complex.  I don't care much for the PDP8,
>>but the -11 might not be a bad place to start.
>
> ARM, unoptimised, is a lot easier to read than x86, almost to the level
> of the pdp10. The problem comes with the thumb/thumb2 "compressed" instructions, 
> which is essential to all modern arm optimisation. 
>
>>OTOH, OP said the person wanted to learn programming, so s/he should
>>probably start with an HLL.  That's one thing to be said for BASIC, the "B"
>>stands for "beginner's" for a reason.  You can learn most of the basics of
>>programming without all the complexity.  Interpreters are available for
>>free for most systems.
>
> Dabble around in basic, yes. Or even a *n*x shell. But do go for a heavily
> structured language too.

I would challenge anyone to find a good book on BASIC  in the shops nowadays.

Ruby, in a uncomplex fashion, is fairly easy.

(Why does every new book on Python have the examples in Ipython?. 
Surely the best ways to learn is to write a program, find out where
the faults are, and edit them).

Best of all is to an hear an un-english-speaker trying to learn it, and
realizing how complex it is.

-- 
greymaus
 .
  .
...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161773

From	Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx>
Date	2016-04-01 09:52 +0000
Message-ID	<dm6um8FflomU28@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#161761

On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 21:32:33 +0000, mausg wrote:

> I would challenge anyone to find a good book on BASIC  in the shops
> nowadays.

I learned with the origianl book by none other than Kemeny and Kurtz!



-- 
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...

Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
 http://www.mirrorservice.org

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161783

From	mausg@mail.com
Date	2016-04-01 13:56 +0000
Message-ID	<slrnnfsvf4.220.mausg@Smaus.org>
In reply to	#161773

On 2016-04-01, Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> wrote:
> On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 21:32:33 +0000, mausg wrote:
>
>> I would challenge anyone to find a good book on BASIC  in the shops
>> nowadays.
>
> I learned with the origianl book by none other than Kemeny and Kurtz!
>
>
>

1971, 9.? on amazon.uk, NEW and used.
You are right.. but there would be a big variation in Basics.

-- 
greymaus
 .
  .
...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161785

From	Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx>
Date	2016-04-01 14:32 +0000
Message-ID	<dm7f3lFflomU32@mid.individual.net>
In reply to	#161783

On Fri, 01 Apr 2016 13:56:08 +0000, mausg wrote:

> On 2016-04-01, Bob Eager <news0006@eager.cx> wrote:
>> On Thu, 31 Mar 2016 21:32:33 +0000, mausg wrote:
>>
>>> I would challenge anyone to find a good book on BASIC  in the shops
>>> nowadays.
>>
>> I learned with the origianl book by none other than Kemeny and Kurtz!
>>
>>
>>
>>
> 1971, 9.? on amazon.uk, NEW and used.
> You are right.. but there would be a big variation in Basics.

There wasn't much in those days. The BASIC I actually used (which I doubt 
anyone has even heard of) was close enough for K&K to work OK.

-- 
Using UNIX since v6 (1975)...

Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
 http://www.mirrorservice.org

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161835

From	hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com
Date	2016-04-02 13:04 -0700
Message-ID	<edfd2fbe-cf92-495d-be24-eb714aeb5792@googlegroups.com>
In reply to	#161761

On Thursday, March 31, 2016 at 5:32:35 PM UTC-4, ma...@mail.com wrote:

> I would challenge anyone to find a good book on BASIC  in the shops nowadays.

BASIC now has various versions--Visual Basic (still in use, AFAIK),
and the other BASIC, which in turn had several versions.

I'm not even sure modern computers will even run old BASIC (e.g.
QBASIC from DOS 5.0 or GW-BASIC), since the upgrade in bitsize
requirements.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#161841

From	"J. Clarke" <j.clarke.873638@gmail.com>
Date	2016-04-02 16:40 -0400
Message-ID	<MPG.3169f838814d617898a05f@news.eternal-september.org>
In reply to	#161835

In article <edfd2fbe-cf92-495d-be24-eb714aeb5792@googlegroups.com>, 
hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com says...
> 
> On Thursday, March 31, 2016 at 5:32:35 PM UTC-4, ma...@mail.com wrote:
> 
> > I would challenge anyone to find a good book on BASIC  in the shops nowadays.
> 
> BASIC now has various versions--Visual Basic (still in use, AFAIK),
> and the other BASIC, which in turn had several versions.
> 
> I'm not even sure modern computers will even run old BASIC (e.g.
> QBASIC from DOS 5.0 or GW-BASIC), since the upgrade in bitsize
> requirements.

You need to jump through some hoops to make it work and I've never found 
a completely satisfactory solution--one of these days I'm going to have 
to see if I can get it to run under BOCHS.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 18 of 21 — ← Prev page 1 … 16 17 [18] 19 20 21 Next page →

csiph-web

Which Books Can You Recommend For Learning Computer Programming?

Contents

#162221

#164161

#161571

#161572

#161604

#161607

#161628

#161629

#161641

#161642

#161647

#161660

#161696

#161698

#161761

#161773

#161783

#161785

#161835

#161841