Zed Shaw disagrees:
http://oppugn.us/posts/1272050135.html , and I think he has a point.
"The book is weird, uses antiquated technology, has horrible examples [...]"
Dive into Python has code examples which use ODBC:
"He has a [...] book that purports to teach people programming that still, in 2010, references a piece of crap technology from the 90's. Yes, he actually used that technology to teach Python in the beginning of his book six years ago. [...]
Meanwhile, Mr. Pilgrim's book hasn't been updated in 6 years even though it's [...] online and people can send him patches. [...]
Dive Into Python isn't just bad because of the use of ODBC, it's also just full of bad initial examples. Take a look at your first Python program and boggle at all the bizarre stuff a beginner has to suddenly comprehend:
- A function, with a giant doc comment right away.
- Weird underscore variables with a bad font making it look like one underscore.
- A list comprehension for-loop to join a string using a format string off a tuple.
- A dict, formatted with backslash chars that aren't even needed.
Holy crap, how in the hell is that a good first example? Even worse is it starts a trend within the book of using ODBC as a theme to teach Python."
Edit: Snipped strong language.