Learning C from old books ??

[Robert Gamble]

Well, I've been studying C for a while and K&R is my first book, it's nice
to learn from, and it's a very good book, with challenging exercises I
think its a perfect first book.

It certainly is a very good book and I am glad you have found it useful.
My point is that it is not for everyone in that it assumes prior
programming experience (as the authors state in the preface) and that,
more importantly, it is certainly not required to learn C or converse
about the language as the parent poster suggested.

Rob Gamble

 

[Dan Pop]

Actually, for a complete beginner, the last public draft would serve
almost as well, and it's available for free at
<http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n869/>.

They're both perfectly useless for a complete beginner, because they have
not been designed as tutorial documents.

Dan

 

[Dan Pop]

The copyright date on K&R, 2nd edition, which is pretty much the bible, is
1988. You may just be seeing differences in pedantry.

You may want to avoid its first printing, however.

Dan

 

[Dan Pop]

You MUST have K&R if you are to use this forum for self study. MPJ

Nope, you don't, but it helps a lot if you do. It's much easier to say
that you have a problem understanding the code example at page X than to
actually reproduce the code in question. Most regulars have a copy of
K&R2 handy and they can simply read the code from it. And, of course,
it's better than most other tutorials.

Dan

 

[Merrill & Michele]

Late '80s probably won't be as helpful as they could be; the standard
defining the language that whatever compiler you're using is likely
to implement was published in 1989, so books before that are probably
working with a language that isn't quite the same as the language you're
trying to learn.

With books from mid/late '90s you shouldn't run into any language
problems, but be aware that there are a lot of bad books out there.
If you can get a good textbook from mid-'90s on, it will probably be
perfectly usable. If you're not sure it's good, go ahead and use it
anyways, but be aware that it might not be perfectly reliable - a good
indicator is to see how often you get corrected in comp.lang.c after
stating things you learned from the book.



They're probably still worth trying to learn from. If you can get your
hands on a copy of K&R2, it's both a good textbook and a useful sanity
check for other ones.

A lot of the differences between books, especially the more recent
ones, will just be style differences; some will reflect the author's
misunderstanding (or just can't-be-bothered-to-learn) of the language;
and some will reflect an "all the world's a <something>" attitude.
Following what we talk about here is a good way to work out which
is which.



When the lottery money comes in, look for books with "Kernighan" or
"Plauger" in the author list. Kernighan (the K in K&R) was involved
with a lot of the early development of the language, and Plauger has
written a major implementation of the standard library (as well as a
book about it). Add "Stroustrup" to the list if you're looking for C++
books; he was the primary designer of C++.


dave

--
Dave Vandervies (e-mail address removed)
Perhaps the original version of the program worked.
OK, this takes us *way* off topic for any computer related newsgroup, but
you've got to admit its a theoretical possibility. --Ken Hagan in

comp.arch

Holy crap! You're still talking about this? Is there still anyone who
thinks K&R is unnecessary for self study in this forum. Let him say i, so
that I--using the pigeonholing principle--can become something other than
the stupidest guy around here. MPJ

 

[Dave Vandervies]

Holy crap! You're still talking about this? Is there still anyone who
thinks K&R is unnecessary for self study in this forum. Let him say i, so
that I--using the pigeonholing principle--can become something other than
the stupidest guy around here. MPJ

K&R, while a rather good text (one of the best), is hardly necessary
for self study; any other good textbook will be perfectly adequate as
a replacement, and even a mediocre textbook, with appropriate guidance
from sources outside the textbook, is sufficient.


dave

 

[Stuart Gerchick]

K&R, while a rather good text (one of the best), is hardly necessary
for self study; any other good textbook will be perfectly adequate as
a replacement, and even a mediocre textbook, with appropriate guidance
from sources outside the textbook, is sufficient.


dave

While that is true and there are many other good and adequate books
available, make it easy...just find and read an ANSI C version of K&R

 

[Jhon smith]

HI all again,I just thought I give you a list of the books I have for you to
say yay or nay to as far as good learning tools.

I don`t know if it`s relevent,but I have a little machine code and assembler
experence from the old c64 days,I never really used basic,and have no real
experence of other languages,I don`t like being kept to far removed from the
machine,thats what i liked about the old MC/assem all those bit/byte opps.

I have looked at things like Pure basic,as as a start in PC programming,but
I like somthing about C,I hate the idea of great big fat programs,when it`s
not needed,however I am finding it a daunting task,as If I look on the net I
see reference to things,libarys,headers,API`s and many other things,Yet no
firm explanation of what is C,and what is purley added buy others,What is
needed to learn and what is at least for the time being,not nessesary.

With the `Basics` it seems much more defined,Learn the basic your
using,learn windows/hardware your using it on,Just with C I know where to
start,I just don`t know Which direction to go and howfar in that direction
to go.

My goal really is to learn C,then if Im upto it,more about using C on the PC
with MS windows(ie windows,graphics,sound),If I ever get that far,and
possibly C++.

The other BIG problem is that I am pretty damn thick,but I really would be
happy if all I can learn to do is simple apps,such a Phone book,with
input/output,disk loading/saving,sorting and such,But I don`t want to have a
basic language do it for me with a few commands,where`s the fun and thinking
in that!.

Any way enough ranting,Here`s my books.

C The complete reference---Herbert schildt first edition,1987
Simple C,Ian sinclair ---1988
Absolute beginners Guide to C,Greg Perry,second edition---1994
C++ Primer plus,Stephan prata,second edition---1995
Learning to program in C,N kantaris---Reprinted 1997
C/C++ Programmers bible Kris jamsa,Lars klander,first edition,---1998

Thanks again.

 

[Michael Mair]

HI all again,I just thought I give you a list of the books I have for you to
say yay or nay to as far as good learning tools.
[snip]

C The complete reference---Herbert schildt first edition,1987

Do not use this. H.Schildt is, even though his books sell, a
source of misinformation. Even if you had the newest "C unpacked"
or whatever by him, I would give the same advice.

Simple C,Ian sinclair ---1988

Pre-C89. I would not use it.

Absolute beginners Guide to C,Greg Perry,second edition---1994
C++ Primer plus,Stephan prata,second edition---1995
Learning to program in C,N kantaris---Reprinted 1997
C/C++ Programmers bible Kris jamsa,Lars klander,first edition,---1998

Have never seen any of them. Get decided whether you want
to learn C and then maybe C++ or whether C++ is what you are
heading for. Books for both languages at once sound a little
bit suspicious to me.

-Michael

 

[BigJet]

Wow c64, those are the magic words Jhon. I still fire up my old c64 box now
and then, like visiting an old friend. My copy of "Mapping the Commodore
64" still sits undisturbed next to Art Margolis' Troubleshooting & Repairing
your C64 with lots of bookmarks sticking out the top. Ah, those were the
days, when machine language was the only viable design option. This stuff
is ancient, but then so am I. Remember the punch card days and vacuum tube,
block-long monsters with 16K of iron core memory? My "Univac Programmer
Reference" is still on my bookshelf too. Yes kiddies, once upon a time,
computers used plugboard technology; New York City was chock-full of
plugboard machines that were programmed with patch cords - now there's a
challenge. No, I did not know Babbage. Learn from old books? Of course,
the older the better. Buy an old computer at a yard sale. Take it apart.
Observe closely the chips, and learn what function each chip plays in
relation to machine instructions - how each instruction opens and closes
gates allowing the information to flow around the motherboard and report
back a single yes-no, on-off impulse to the processor. Programming becomes
clearer when the mind sees the mechanical actions resulting from the
progression of individual instructions grouped into routines. It matters
little what brand the computer is or was - the principal is the same. To
lean from old books is to build a solid base, like learning Greek before
attending Medical school, and Latin as law prerequisite.

As to learning the C language, remember C and C++ are not the same. C is as
close to bare metal as any compiler language will take you. C++ begins the
assent into the contrived world of objects, leading ultimately to
Microsoft's Visual tangle of confusion - computer verbigeration to tie the
public to one manufacturer's piss poor products. (I am speaking of .NET not
the W95 core.) I suggest you download LCC, a free C only compiler. Print
out all the manuals - several hundred pages, but well worth the ink if you
intend to learn C from the ground up. English is not the author's first
language, but he has a clear vision of what C is and how to use it, that
this language barrier is quickly overcome.

--Good luck Jhon, and good learning.
(e-mail address removed)

 

[Jhon smith]

LCC downloaded,Printer hidding inthe corner.

Wow c64, those are the magic words Jhon. I still fire up my old c64 box
now
and then, like visiting an old friend. My copy of "Mapping the Commodore
64" still sits undisturbed next to Art Margolis' Troubleshooting &
Repairing
your C64 with lots of bookmarks sticking out the top. Ah, those were the
days, when machine language was the only viable design option. This stuff
is ancient, but then so am I. Remember the punch card days and vacuum
tube,
block-long monsters with 16K of iron core memory? My "Univac Programmer
Reference" is still on my bookshelf too. Yes kiddies, once upon a time,
computers used plugboard technology; New York City was chock-full of
plugboard machines that were programmed with patch cords - now there's a
challenge. No, I did not know Babbage. Learn from old books? Of course,
the older the better. Buy an old computer at a yard sale. Take it apart.
Observe closely the chips, and learn what function each chip plays in
relation to machine instructions - how each instruction opens and closes
gates allowing the information to flow around the motherboard and report
back a single yes-no, on-off impulse to the processor. Programming
becomes
clearer when the mind sees the mechanical actions resulting from the
progression of individual instructions grouped into routines. It matters
little what brand the computer is or was - the principal is the same. To
lean from old books is to build a solid base, like learning Greek before
attending Medical school, and Latin as law prerequisite.

As to learning the C language, remember C and C++ are not the same. C is
as
close to bare metal as any compiler language will take you. C++ begins the
assent into the contrived world of objects, leading ultimately to
Microsoft's Visual tangle of confusion - computer verbigeration to tie the
public to one manufacturer's piss poor products. (I am speaking of .NET
not
the W95 core.) I suggest you download LCC, a free C only compiler. Print
out all the manuals - several hundred pages, but well worth the ink if you
intend to learn C from the ground up. English is not the author's first
language, but he has a clear vision of what C is and how to use it, that
this language barrier is quickly overcome.

--Good luck Jhon, and good learning.
(e-mail address removed)