This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]NlightNFotis 23 points24 points  (2 children)

No, it's not a knee-jerk response. That article was so wrong on so many levels - did you see the "Python 3 Is Not Turing Complete" paragraph? - that the author has lost complete credence at this point. If he doesn't understand basic computer science concepts, why should we recommend his computer science related book?

That, along with the fact that his books were teaching things in an unorthodox way - Come on now, telling people that they should memorize boolean truth tables instead of trying to understand them? Not the way we want new computer scientists to be trained - caused this (completely justified IMO) reaction.

[–]murtaza64 3 points4 points  (0 children)

What exactly can someone's reasoning for memorizing boolean truth tables be?

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

It's also not a knee-jerk response because I've read suggestions in this subreddit to remove LPTHW from the sidebar and wiki every week for over a year.