Most helpful customer reviews
11 of 11 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars
The Classic, May 20 2000
This is one of the great classics of computer science. I bought my first copy 15 years ago, and I still don't feel I have learned everything the book has to teach. I have learned enough to write a couple books on Lisp that (currently) have four to five stars. Yet SICP, which is pretty much the bible of our world, has only three? How can this be? Reading the reviews made it clear what happened. An optimistic professor somewhere has been feeding SICP to undergrads who are not ready for it. But it is encouraging to see how many thoughtful people have come forward to defend the book. Let's see if we can put this in terms that the undergrads will understand -- a problem set: 1. Kenneth Clark said that if a lot of smart people have liked something that you don't, you should try and figure out what they saw in it. List 10 qualities that SICP's defenders have claimed for it. 2. How is the intention of SICP different from that of Knuth? Kernighan & Ritchie? An algorithms textbook? 3. Does any other book fulfill this purpose better? 4. What other programming books first published in the mid 1980s are still relevant today? 5. Could the concepts in this book have been presented any better in a language other than Scheme? 6. Who is al? Why is his name in lowercase?
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars
A great book and a magnificent vocational test, Aug 12 2002
SICP is an excellent, perhaps the best, advanced introduction to computer science and programming. It covers topics such as functional abstraction, data abstraction, OOP, program design, constraint programming and logic programming, always from a language design point of view. You will need a decent mathematical background to follow it. If it's such a great textbook, then why half of the reviewers hate it? Elementary: SICP is not just a textbook, it's also a Computer Science aptitude and vocational test. If you read it and like it, then Congratulations! You are a real programmer and computer scientist, with hair on your chest. If you don't like it, then you should be studying something else. Law, mortuary science, whatever, but not CS.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars
The usefulness of this book is not immediately obvious., Feb 20 2002
This book is not about learning lisp. It's even only fringely about learning how to program. What's contained in it is more than a simple description of abstraction, or modularity, or anything else you'd find in an introductory text. It even escews talking about those concepts in their simplest form to a degree. It approaches them from a 50,000 foot level, discussion how everything is an abstraction, and by layering these abstractions we can build comprehensible programs. This book has the possibility to change how you think if you listen to it. That being said, it is _not_ a book on how to build software. I've seen many good software engineers discard this book because most of the code presented has no business anywhere near a real software engineering project. Even a lot of the concepts portrayed don't belong in day to day use. But at the end of the day, this book gets the closest I've seen to explaining the hard parts of computer science and software engineering. It's a book about patterns without explicitly discussing them. It's a book about how design software without much explicit discussion of the design process. Much like some of the abstractions and "meta" concepts that it presents, it's a book that teaches you how to learn how to learn about programming...
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
|