Books programmers don't really read | Hacker News Reader

Books programmers don't really read

billthelizard.com

36 pointsmlLK15 comments

There are books that nobody reads because they don't contain good ideas, and there are books that nobody reads because they're too dense. The second category contains some of the most valuable books out there.

I'd put the gang of four design patterns book into the second category. Often, a book or journal article is there to be cited as a breakthrough work on a subject, but very few people read it - instead, they read the thousands of other, more easily accessible books and articles on the subject.

This is why "Head First Design Patterns" is in the "books I've read list", and "GOF" is in the books nobody reads list. GOF is on my shelf, and I've browsed through it, but I go to other sources to understand and implement design patterns.

Personally I recommend the first half of Ivan Horton's Beginning C++ for any beginning to intermediate programmer. It's a little dated, but it does a great job of explaining what things look like in memory and why longs are not all the same size etc. It's clear without being overly verbose. And more importantly it's examples are strong examples of what type of code I want to read.

In his list of "Books Most Programmers Have Actually Read", I miss a book that I'm convinced that every self-respecting Mac OS X programmer read: Aaron Hillegass' "Cocoa Programming for Mac OS X"

In short: "Please stop recommending books to others that you haven't read yourself."

I've really wondered how many people have actually read TAOCP, in particular. I haven't. I'm still trying to finish SICP (which is fantastic, IMHO, as is CTM), among others. It's too easy to just start reading yet another book, but the real value comes when you get past the first chapter or two - that's usually just rehashed intro material, anyway.

For discussion's sake, what are some programming books people consider worth reading that aren't Big Highly-Regarded Tomes?

I'm really fond of _The Little MLer_ (for understanding types), _Thinking Forth_ (a lot of good ideas about refactoring and general program design), and _Programming in Lua_ (as concise and well-written as K&R, lucidly covers material like coroutines and prototype-based OO). Any of them could also be mostly read in a weekend. Also, _Peopleware_, though it's more about the industry, project management, working in teams, etc.

I have, first edition even. :-) The first algorithms book that I really found readable was Sedgewick's Algorithms now updated to C, C++ and Java. Even now I will read Sedgewick first for clarity and go back to TAOCP or CLRS for analysis.

Meh. I'm not convinced. I've only read one book on his list of books programmers have actually read and have read more than half of the books (not AOCP or Dragon Book) on the list of book programmers haven't actually read.

I've not even heard of a few of the ones on the first list.

CLRS is a reasonable introduction to computer science, not programming. It starts off with basic concepts of the math in CS and then sorting algorithms -- just like any decent intro to CS course / book.

The C++ Programming Language is definitely not for language implementors. For that there's a (fairly accessible) language specification that's also published in book form, which is also useful as a reference for things which are out of scope for the The C++ Programming Language. It is, however, not a good intro book, and honestly, not a great reference book either. It's just that it's somewhat more comprehensive than other references.

I dunno about this. Of the books under "books most programmers have actually read," the only one I've read is the C programming language (K&R). But I think I'm probably more likely to read the GoF design patterns book or the rest of my college algorithms book ( http://www.amazon.com/Algorithm-Design-Jon-Kleinberg/dp/0321... ) than Programming Pearls or Effective Java.

"... I've read all of these books myself, so I have no difficulty believing that any moderately competent programmer has read them as well ..."

Books, books doesn't anyone read code?

I read a large portion of the Dragon Book in University. It was interesting, but I didn't get all the way through it. I've honestly found books like "Refactoring" to be a more valuable a read.

Hurray for Amazon affiliate book spamming!

"Disclosure: All of the links in the following lists are Amazon affiliate links. If you're opposed to me making a few cents off this blog, but you're interested in any of these books, they're easy enough to find by searching Google for the individual titles."

The author is honest enough to inform you about it.

I expect just about anyone linking a list of books on Amazon to be using affiliate links.

I find Amazon affiliate links (especially text-based links) to be perhaps the least offensive form of advertising revenue on the web.

You could always try this greasemonkey script which always substitutes your own Amazon affiliate id so you can sponsor yourself.

http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/3468

Which directly breaks the Amazon Associates TOS and would allow Amazon to not pay you and delete your account.

https://affiliate-program.amazon.com/gp/associates/agreement

"You may not purchase products during sessions initiated through the links on your site for your own use, for resale or commercial use of any kind. This includes orders for customers or on behalf of customers or orders for products to be used by you or your friends, relatives, or associates in any manner. Such purchases may result (in our sole discretion) in the withholding of referral fees and/or the termination of this Agreement."

Reply on news.ycombinator.com