Were you going to let the rest of us mere mortals in on the reason?
I think it's good to offer a version of SICP adapted to a language that's used today very prominently and is relevant to many current jobs in the industry.
I think it's good to offer a version of SICP adapted to a language that's used today very prominently and is relevant to many current jobs in the industry.
The fact that this is a book about learning to program, not about maximizing your potential for jobs. It's a compsci book to learn to be a good programmer, not a book about synergizing industry trends to build your resume.
When SICP was written, most people still wrote in Assembly for most things but COBOL, ADA, and old-school FORTRAN were also popular. Part of the longevity of the book is its appropriate choice of language.
Would it be as enlightening to write a series of JS compilers in JS? Or are they writing Lisp compilers in JS? Doesn't that miss the entire point of the book?
Scheme (in contrast to Java etc) is special because of its very easy syntax and how it is evaluated. Since SICP is about syntax/structure and its evaluation/interpretation you should really stick to lisp.
> I think it's good to offer a version of SICP adapted to a language that's used today very prominently and is relevant to many current jobs in the industry.
I don't. Maybe this Javascript-Version is also a great book, but if you don't know scheme/lisp and wonder why scheme is a better choice for SICP I encourage you to read the original.
The Feynman Lectures uses an example of a screw jack with 10 threads per inch, and a 20" lever. Should we update this to a name brand screw jack with 8 or 16 threads per inch, and an 18" breaker bar, because those are common in industry today?
Be sure to extend the introduction of that chapter to include a history of this particular screw jack company, and who currently holds the trademark, and all the major companies that make screw jacks today, and typical uses of jacks, and how they're constructed [1].
Because it's widely used in the industry.
That's my point. Is that bad somehow that it's written in a familiar and accessible language for the majority?
One can sharpen its knowledge without the barrier to understand a new language and syntax.
I'm curious who's reading SICP who finds it difficult to grok in Scheme, or more useful in Javascript. What are you doing in the industry that familiar syntax is top priority?
I would think that other books, specific to Javascript, would be a much better fit for people writing pretty much anything in Javascript.
> What are you doing in the industry that familiar syntax is top priority?
The question is more like: "Do I want to invest time into learning a new language just to read and comprehend new and interesting concepts?".
With endless knowledge out there, I usually gravitate towards the least friction.
> I would think that other books, specific to Javascript, would be a much better fit for people writing pretty much anything in Javascript.
I don't think of this book as the ultimate JavaScript book. It just uses it as the most accessible language out there, and that matters a lot imho.
Well, it would certainly help to change the examples to proper SI units.
SICP is not about learning any particular language, it is about learning concepts which will make you understand JavaScript much better than anyone who only knows JavaScript.
If having to learn a new language like Scheme is an impediment to starting SICP, then you will not get past the first chapter anyway.